Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

A California jury has ruled that Meta and Google are liable for $3m in damages in a landmark social media addiction lawsuit. The case, which began over a month ago, accused the companies of designing features intended to hook young users, including notifications and autoplay features.The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman referred to as KGM or Kaley, claimed that she became addicted to social media at a young age, which exacerbated her mental health issues. She began using YouTube at age six and Meta-owned Instagram at age nine.The jury deliberated for over 40 hours across nine days before reaching a verdict. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri testified in the case, although YouTube chief executive Neal Mohan was not called to testify.The verdict is the latest in a wave of lawsuits targeting social media companies. There is a looming federal social media addiction case slated to begin in June in Oakland, California. On Tuesday in New Mexico, a jury found that Meta violated state law by misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, and by enabling child sexual exploitation on those platforms.Legal experts say the verdict will shape future litigation. 'The fact the jury found Meta and Google liable represents that these cases have real exposure to the social media giants, and are going to frame how future litigation will proceed,' entertainment lawyer Tre Lovell told Al Jazeera.

A recent jury verdict in California has held Meta and YouTube liable for the harm caused to a young woman, KGM, due to the addictive nature of their platforms. The plaintiff claimed that her social media use, which began at the age of six, led to injuries including body dysmorphia and thoughts of self-harm.The jury's decision marks a significant milestone in the ongoing debate about the impact of social media on young people. The verdict suggests that companies like Meta and YouTube, which have been accused of designing features to keep users engaged, can be held accountable for the harm caused by their platforms.Critics of the judgment argue that it could lead to a flood of lawsuits against social media companies, while others see it as a necessary step to protect young people from the potential dangers of social media. The verdict may also prompt regulatory changes and increased scrutiny of social media companies' practices.According to a report from Brown University, social media can be addictive due to its ability to activate the brain's reward system, releasing feel-good hormones such as dopamine. This can lead to a vicious cycle of use and addiction, particularly among young people who spend many hours a day on social media.In response to growing concerns, some countries have taken action to protect young people. Australia, for example, has banned children under 16 from using social media. In the US, there have been calls for social media companies to be required to put warning labels on their sites, but such proposals have yet to gain traction.The verdict is also significant given the close ties between the tech industry and the US administration. The appointment of Mark Zuckerberg to the president's council of advisers on science and technology has raised concerns about the influence of tech companies on policy decisions.Ultimately, the jury verdict sends a clear message to tech titans that they will be held accountable for the impact of their platforms on young people. As the debate about social media regulation continues, this verdict is likely to have far-reaching implications for the industry and for the protection of young people online.

The House of Lords has backed an Australian-style social media ban for under-16s, with peers voting 266 to 141 against proposals for a public consultation.Conservative former minister Lord Nash said the vote sent an 'unambiguous message' to the government, emphasizing that 'hollow promises and half-measures are not enough.'The vote comes after a jury in Los Angeles found that Meta, the owner of Google and Facebook, designed deliberately addictive products that harmed a 20-year-old's mental health.Nash proposed the age limit as part of the children's wellbeing and schools bill, stating that 'techies' had taken a 'cavalier approach' to content damaging to children.The decision could influence thousands of similar lawsuits in the US accusing social media companies of deliberately causing harm.Lady Cass, a paediatrician and crossbench peer, criticized the government for 'failing to understand the impact of social media on our children.'

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced plans to address addictive features in social media platforms, signaling a potential regulatory shift following a significant US court ruling that held Meta and YouTube accountable for harms caused by their technology designs.The prime minister emphasized that the recent California court verdict reflects rising public expectations for more aggressive regulation of social media platforms. "I'm absolutely clear that we need to go further," Starmer stated, adding that "the status quo isn't good enough" in terms of protecting children online.Starmer specifically mentioned that the government is consulting about banning social media for under-16s and expressed strong commitment to addressing addictive features within social media platforms. These remarks come amid growing international pressure on tech companies to address the potential harms of their products on young users.In the landmark US case, a California jury found Meta and YouTube negligent for failing to provide adequate warnings about the potential dangers of their platforms. The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman who claimed she became addicted to social media during her childhood, was awarded $6 million (£4.5 million) in damages, with Meta responsible for 70% of the payment and YouTube covering the remainder.The Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed the verdict as "a reckoning" for tech companies, stating in a joint statement: "For too long, families have paid the price for platforms built with total disregard for the children they reach." They emphasized that "today, the truth has been heard and precedent has been set" regarding children's safety versus corporate profits.Both Google, which owns YouTube, and Meta have indicated they will challenge the decision. Google claimed the case "misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site," while Meta stated it "respectfully disagrees with the verdict and is evaluating our legal options." The verdict came after nine days of deliberation in the first lawsuit concerning social media's alleged harm to young people to reach trial.The ruling has resonated beyond the courtroom, with European Commission digital chief Henna Virkkunen noting that such cases send "a very clear message" to online platforms about the risks they pose. Campaigners for safer social media have celebrated the decision as a potential watershed moment in regulating platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and X.The Molly Rose Foundation, established after the death of 14-year-old Molly Russell who was exposed to harmful content on Instagram, called for legislation that would make "safety and wellbeing the price for tech firms to pay for doing business in the UK." Thomas Lancaster, a computing expert at Imperial College London, emphasized that policies must be effectively enforced to protect those they're designed to safeguard.Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, declared that "the era of big tech invincibility is over," suggesting that the verdict validates concerns about tech platforms' impact on young people that have been raised for years.

Los Angeles Rams star receiver Puka Nacua is facing a civil lawsuit filed by a woman named Madison Atiabi, who claims he made an antisemitic statement and bit her on the shoulder on New Year's Eve. According to the lawsuit, Nacua allegedly said 'fuck all Jews' during a dinner in Los Angeles, which Atiabi, who is Jewish, found deeply distressing.The lawsuit also alleges that Nacua bit Atiabi on the shoulder, leaving teeth marks, and also bit her friend's thumb 'with such force that her companion screamed in acute pain.' The suit cites gender violence and negligence in addition to the antisemitic remark and biting incident.Nacua's attorney, Levi McCathern, has strongly denied the allegations, stating that multiple sober witnesses confirm Nacua never made the claimed comments. McCathern described the bites as 'horseplay' and announced that Nacua intends to sue Atiabi for defamation. This development comes after Nacua apologized last December for performing a gesture that invoked antisemitic tropes during an internet livestream.The 24-year-old receiver had a stellar season with the Rams, leading the league with 129 catches, 1,715 yards, and 10 touchdowns, and then leading the NFL again in playoff catches. His future with the Rams includes eligibility for a contract extension this offseason that could make him one of the highest-paid receivers in NFL history.

A landmark jury verdict has found Meta and YouTube liable for deliberately designing addictive products that harmed a young user, KGM. The jury ruled that the tech companies were both negligent and failed to provide adequate warnings about the potential dangers of their products.The plaintiff, KGM, testified that she became addicted to YouTube at age six and Instagram at nine, which she claimed had deleterious effects on her wellbeing. By age 10, she said she had become depressed and was engaging in self-harm as a result. Her social media use allegedly caused her to have strained relationships with her family and in school.The jury awarded KGM $6m in damages, with Meta to pay 70% and YouTube the remainder. This lawsuit, over social media's alleged harm to young people, was the first of its kind to go to trial.KGM's lawyers argued that the companies' features, such as infinite scrolling and video autoplay, were designed to keep people on the apps and made the products addictive. The plaintiffs' arguments mirrored those brought against big tobacco in the 1990s, focusing on the addictive qualities of social media and the companies' public denial despite knowledge of their products' harms.Meta and YouTube have consistently denied wrongdoing and plan to appeal the verdict. A YouTube spokesperson said the video service was a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site. Meta said KGM's mental health issues were brought on by a difficult home life and social media use was not to blame.This trial is the first in a consolidated group of cases brought in California against Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Snap on behalf of more than 1,600 plaintiffs. The next bellwether case is scheduled to go to trial in July.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has accused Crispin Odey, a former hedge fund manager, of attempting to manipulate a victim of sexual assault into silence. According to evidence presented in court, Odey sent a text to his former employee in January 2022, warning her that the FCA could question her about him.Odey, who has previously accepted that he groped the woman without her consent in 2005, claimed he was under the influence of sedatives at the time. He now faces a number of sexual harassment allegations and has launched a £79m libel lawsuit against the Financial Times.The FCA's lawyer, Clare Sibson, argued that Odey was trying to manipulate the victim into silence and had a clear motive to discourage her from providing her account to the FCA. Odey, however, claimed he only wanted to ensure the woman would "tell the truth".The hearing continues, with Odey hoping to overturn the FCA's decision to ban him from the UK's financial services industry. In addition to the libel lawsuit, Odey is also facing civil personal injury claims by five women, including one who accused him of rape.

Football's world governing body FIFA is facing a lawsuit from supporter groups over allegedly 'excessive' ticket prices for the 2026 World Cup final. The Football Supporters Europe (FSE) and Euroconsumers have filed a formal complaint with the European Commission, accusing FIFA of abusing its monopoly position to impose high ticket prices and unfair purchasing conditions on European fans.The FSE claims that the cheapest openly available final tickets start at $4,185, more than seven times the cost of the cheapest 2022 World Cup final ticket. In contrast, the cheapest UEFA Euro 2024 final tickets were priced at 95 euros ($100). FIFA's own bid documents had projected an average ticket price of $1,408, which has not been met.The 2026 World Cup, hosted jointly by Canada, Mexico, and the United States, will feature 104 matches and 48 teams. While almost seven million tickets have been made available, prices have soared for in-demand games, with most tickets costing at least $200 for matches involving leading nations. Some tickets on FIFA's official resale site are being offered at astronomical prices, such as $143,750 for a category three seat at the MetLife Stadium in New Jersey.The FSE argues that FIFA's actions are unfair and unacceptable in a competitive market, highlighting the initial promise of tickets being available from as little as $21, but instead starting at $60 for some matches.

The chasm between Silicon Valley's tech elite and everyday people is growing ever larger, as the industry doubles down on artificial intelligence. Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang predicts $1tn in sales by 2028, a staggering figure that equates to 3% of the entire US yearly GDP.Meanwhile, 65% of Americans don't use AI in their work at all, according to Pew Research. The survey also shows that Americans are wary of AI and believe both political parties are regulating it poorly. Meta is reallocating huge amounts of its spending to AI, cutting jobs and scaling back metaverse ambitions. The company's Reality Labs division has recorded losses of $80bn since 2020.In a stark illustration of the divide, Mark Zuckerberg is building an AI agent to perform his work as CEO of Meta. The AI industry is splitting away from the lives of everyday people, with exclusive polling conducted for the Guardian finding that twice as many Americans believe their financial security is getting worse than better.In other tech news, Tesla's Cybertruck has been involved in several fiery crashes, resulting in fatalities and lawsuits. The vehicle's unique design and materials have raised safety concerns, with experts alleging that the truck's design led to these worst-case scenarios.