Breaking News
0
Ad-Free Version. Upgrade your Investing.com experience. Save up to 40% More details

U.S. Supreme Court backs Facebook in case about unwanted texting

Stock MarketsApr 01, 2021 03:45PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
2/2 © Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court is seen in Washington 2/2

By Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday made it easier for businesses to pester consumers with phone calls or text messages by tossing out a lawsuit accusing Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) of violating a federal anti-robocall law.

The justices, in a 9-0 decision authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, sided with Facebook over its argument that text messages the social media company sent did not violate a 1991 federal law called the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

The case highlighted the challenge for the justices in applying outdated laws to modern technologies. The ruling sparked calls for the U.S. Congress to update the law, enacted three decades ago to curb telemarketing abuse by banning most unauthorized robocalls.

"By narrowing the scope of the TCPA, the court is allowing companies the ability to assault the public with a non-stop wave of unwanted calls and texts, around the clock," Democratic Senator Edward Markey and Democratic Representative Anna Eshoo said in a joint statement.

The court ruled that Facebook's actions - sending text messages without consent - did not fit within the technical definition of the type of conduct barred by the law, which was enacted before the rise of modern cellphone technology.

The lawsuit was filed in 2015 in California federal court by Montana resident Noah Duguid, who said Facebook sent him many automatic text messages without his consent. The lawsuit accused Menlo Park, California-based Facebook of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act's restriction on using an automatic telephone dialing system.

Facebook said the security-related messages, triggered when users try to log in to their accounts from a new device or internet browser, were tied to users' cellphone numbers.

"As the court recognized, the law's provisions were never intended to prohibit companies from sending targeted security notifications and the court's decision will allow companies to continue working to keep the accounts of their users safe," Facebook said in a statement.

Sergei Lemberg, Duguid's lawyer, said anyone could steer clear of liability under the law as long as they use similar technology to Facebook's.

"This is a disappointing ruling for anyone who owns a cellphone or values their privacy," Lemberg added.

In this instance, the lawsuit asserted that Facebook's system that sent automated text messages was akin to a traditional automatic dialing system - known as an autodialer - used to send robocalls.

"Duguid's quarrel is with Congress, which did not define an autodialer as malleably as he would have liked," Sotomayor wrote in the ruling.

The law requires that the equipment used must use a "random or sequential number generator" but the court concluded that Facebook's system "does not use such technology," Sotomayor added.

Duguid said that Facebook repeatedly sent him account login notifications by text message to his cellphone even though he was not a Facebook user and never had been. Despite numerous efforts, Duguid said he was unable to stop Facebook from "robotexting" him.

Facebook responded that Duguid had most likely been assigned a phone number that had been previously associated with a Facebook user who had opted in to receive the notifications.

A federal judge threw out the lawsuit but in 2019 the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived it. The 9th Circuit took a broad view of the law, saying it not only bans devices that automatically dial randomly generated numbers but also stored numbers that are not randomly generated.

The National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions said the decision "to narrowly interpret autodialers is a win for the credit union industry."

"We have long fought for this clarity to ensure credit unions can contact their members with important, time-sensitive financial information without fear of violating the TCPA and facing frivolous lawsuits," the association said in a statement.

U.S. Supreme Court backs Facebook in case about unwanted texting
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with other users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind:  

  •            Enrich the conversation, don’t trash it.

  •           Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed. 

  •           Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically. Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user. Racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination will not be tolerated.

  • Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases. Comments that are written in all caps and contain excessive use of symbols will be removed.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and comments containing links will be removed. Phone numbers, email addresses, links to personal or business websites, Skype/Telegram/WhatsApp etc. addresses (including links to groups) will also be removed; self-promotional material or business-related solicitations or PR (ie, contact me for signals/advice etc.), and/or any other comment that contains personal contact specifcs or advertising will be removed as well. In addition, any of the above-mentioned violations may result in suspension of your account.
  • Doxxing. We do not allow any sharing of private or personal contact or other information about any individual or organization. This will result in immediate suspension of the commentor and his or her account.
  • Don’t monopolize the conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also strongly believe in giving everyone a chance to air their point of view. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
Comments (2)
Me comment
Me comment Apr 01, 2021 9:59PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Bad omen for any push to stop big tech from policing facebook posts now.
Steve Lora
Steve Lora Apr 01, 2021 11:18AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
My son is 13 and Facebook keeps asking him to " allow/deny" his photos, mostly friends and birthday partys. FB is full of peds at every level
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Disclaimer: Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. All CFDs (stocks, indexes, futures) and Forex prices are not provided by exchanges but rather by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual market price, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Therefore Fusion Media doesn`t bear any responsibility for any trading losses you might incur as a result of using this data.

Fusion Media or anyone involved with Fusion Media will not accept any liability for loss or damage as a result of reliance on the information including data, quotes, charts and buy/sell signals contained within this website. Please be fully informed regarding the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, it is one of the riskiest investment forms possible.
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email