Meta and Google Ordered to Pay $6 Million in Social Media Addiction Case

In March, a US court ordered Meta and Google to pay $6 million in a significant social media addiction lawsuit. The jury found that both companies knew their platforms posed dangers but failed to warn users. This case marks a notable legal precedent for social media accountability.

Key Highlights

• Meta and Google ordered to pay $6 million in US social media addiction lawsuit.
• Lawyer Mark Lanier used custom AI tools to review case materials and prepare for trial.
• Jury found both companies knew of platform dangers but failed to warn users.

Mark Lanier, the lawyer for the 20-year-old plaintiff identified as "KGM," revealed he used artificial intelligence to review case materials. He relied on AI even on the day he cross-examined Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, despite having only four hours of sleep.

AI's Role in the Legal Strategy

Lanier explained that AI allowed his team to work more efficiently. He told Business Insider that, "In the 10 hours I might be working outside of court, I can get 30 hours of work done." He described AI as a "total game changer" for legal work.

The main AI tool Lanier used was Boodlebox, which provides access to models like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini. The platform also supports collaborative work. Lanier did not use the standard version of Boodlebox. Instead, he worked with the company to create a custom license tailored to his needs, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

He stated, "We could, in essence, take my brain, take 42 years of my experience, take the things that I have learnt and studied and published and not published and incorporate it into the brain that drove my AI queries and results."

Case Details and Court Ruling

The plaintiff, KGM, claimed harm from addictive features on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube. TikTok and Snap settled before the trial began. During the trial, KGM testified that she created YouTube and Instagram accounts at ages eight and nine. She said she soon spent most of her time on Instagram. Her lawyer argued that features like "infinite scroll" were designed to keep users engaged for longer periods.

The jury awarded $6 million to the plaintiff. This included $3 million in compensatory damages, with Meta ordered to pay 70 percent and Google-owned YouTube responsible for the remainder. The court also imposed $3 million in punitive damages.

Lanier compared AI to having "10 additional workers who are incredibly well-trained, who know the file inside and out, who work 24 hours a day and don't even need to take a break for the restroom, much less PTO." He clarified that he does not use AI to perform unchecked legal work, stating, "I'm not going to say, 'Go do my research and write my brief.'" He noted that AI sometimes cited incorrect information, emphasizing the need for human oversight.

Industry Reactions and Future Implications

The verdict is considered a bellwether for thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies. Meta said it disagreed with the verdict and was evaluating its legal options. Google stated that the case misunderstood YouTube and that it planned to appeal the decision.