When Facebook settled a class-action lawsuit about its sponsored stories program last week, the company
promisedto change some of the language in its terms of service, in order to reflect
how the program operates.
Among other changes, Facebook said it would add language requiring minors to represent that their parents agreed to the terms of service -- including the use of their
children's names and photos in sponsored stories ads.
Facebook said in court papers that the new provision would be worded as follows: “If you are under the age of eighteen ...you
represent that at least one of your parents or legal guardians has also agreed to the terms of this section (and the use of your name, profile picture, content, and information) on your
behalf.”
The company also said it would add language clarifying that people who “liked” products or services might have their names and images used in ads. (Facebook also
said it would give users more tools to control their appearance in sponsored stories; the company also agreed to pay $15 each to around 600,000 users who objected to their appearance in prior
sponsored-stories ads.)
The social networking service agreed to those conditions in order to settle a lawsuit accusing it of violating a California law prohibiting companies from using
people's names or pictures in ads without their written consent. That law also prohibits the commercial use of minors' names or photos without their parents' permission.
But not everyone
thought that Facebook should be allowed to resolve the lawsuit by rewriting its terms of service. Some watchdogs, including Public Citizen and The Children's Advocacy Institute at the University of
San Diego's Center for Public Interest Law went so far as to ask U.S. District
Court Judge Richard Seeborg in the Northern District of California to scuttle the deal.
The Children's Advocacy Institute specifically argued that children aren't likely to ever see the
provision in the terms of use that requires parental permission -- let alone seek their parents' consent to appear in ads.
Public Citizen pointed out that the deal effectively authorizes
Facebook to continue using minors' names and images in ads without parental permission -- despite the fact that seven states explicitly prohibit companies from doing so.
Seeborg discounted
those objections and approved the settlement last week. Several days later, Facebook formally unveiled its new terms of service. As expected, they require users under 18 to say their parents consent
to the service's conditions.
Now, a coalition of privacy groups says that Facebook's new terms violate its 2012 settlement with the Federal Trade Commission. In that matter, Facebook promised to
obtain users' express consent before sharing their information more broadly than its privacy policy allowed when users uploaded the data.
The privacy groups -- Electronic Privacy
Information Center, Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Watchdog, Patient Privacy Rights, U.S. PIRG, and Privacy Rights Clearinghouse -- specifically call attention to the provision requiring
minors to represent that their parents agree to the terms of service. “The amended language involving teens -- far from getting affirmative express consent from a responsible adult -- attempts
to 'deem' that teenagers 'represent' that a parent, who has been given no notice, have consented to give up teens’ private information. This is contrary to the Order and FTC’s recognition
that teens are a sensitive group, owed extra privacy protections,” the groups say. They are asking the FTC to block Facebook from moving forward with the new terms.