• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, September 30, 2024

Meta is asking a federal judge to throw out claims that it violated wiretap laws by allegedly tracking people's activity on streaming video platforms via the Meta Pixel -- an analytics tool that can transmit information from other companies' websites to Meta.

“Plaintiffs’ claims against Meta for developing the Meta Pixel and making it publicly available for third-party use are meritless and misdirected,” the company argues in papers filed Friday with U.S. District Court Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín in San Francisco.

The social platform adds that web developers decide how to integrate the Meta Pixel into their sites, and that its policies prohibit developers from sending sensitive data to Meta.

The company's papers come in response to a lawsuit by California residents and Facebook users Alan Starzinski, Oladeji Odumosu, Aurelio Medina and Darrnell McCoy, who alleged in a class-action complaint that Meta collected information about their activity on four streaming services – Paramount+, ESPN+, Hulu, and Starz.

The plaintiffs claimed Meta violated federal and California wiretap laws by intentionally intercepting Facebook users' “sensitive and confidential communications” –meaning their video-viewing history – via the Meta Pixel.

Starzinski and the others specifically added in their complaint that Meta “is aware that it is intercepting communications in these circumstances and has taken no remedial action.”

But Meta counters that the allegations, even if proven true, wouldn't prove it intentionally obtained the information.

The company adds that “mere awareness” about data transfers wouldn't be enough to prove a violation of wiretap laws.

The lawsuit is one of numerous recent privacy cases against tech companies stemming from the use of online analytics tools. Decisions so far have been mixed.

For instance, U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick in the Northern District of California recently sided against Meta in a similar battle. In that case, Orrick allowed Facebook users to proceed with claims that the company violated federal and state laws by tracking users' visits to health care providers' websites, via the Meta Pixel. (Meta is currently seeking to appeal that ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.)

A different federal judge – Vince Chhabria, also in the Northern District of California – came to the opposite conclusion in a lawsuit by people who claimed Google's analytics tool wrongly collected sensitive data from health care sites.

Chhabria dismissed claims in that case, ruling that the allegations, even if proven true, wouldn't show Google intended to receive health care data.

Meta now argues that Chhabria's analysis was “thorough and correct,” and is asking Martínez-Olguín to come to the same conclusion.

Martínez-Olguín is scheduled to hold a hearing in the case in February.