Tech

Claiming Facebook Settlement Money For Usage In The Last 16 Years?: Here’s How

Facebook Settlement: Users of Facebook in the United States over the past 16 years now have the opportunity to receive a portion of a $725 million settlement offered by Meta, the parent company of Facebook, as compensation for privacy violations.

To be eligible for a share of the settlement, individuals must submit a claim before August 25.

Alternatively, users have the option to exclude themselves from the settlement if they prefer to pursue a separate legal action against Facebook. The deadline for opting out and initiating an independent legal proceeding is July 26.

The settlement arises from a series of lawsuits filed against Facebook by users who alleged that the company had improperly shared their personal information with third-party entities, including advertisers and data brokers.

These legal actions emerged in the aftermath of the 2018 privacy scandal involving Cambridge Analytica, during which user data was illicitly harvested from Facebook to create voter profiles.

Meta has refuted any responsibility or misconduct as part of the settlement, as stated on the recently established class-action website designed to distribute compensation to Facebook users.

Nonetheless, the agreement enables individuals residing in the United States who utilized Facebook between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022, to submit a monetary claim, provided that they do so before August 23 of this year.

Claim Process for Facebook Settlement:

To claim money under the Facebook settlement, follow these steps:

Visit the claim website provided.
Fill out the claim form with the necessary information.
If preferred, you can also print out the claim form and mail it to the following address: Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103.

Claim Form Information Required for Facebook Settlement:

The claim form will require the following basic information:

Your full name
Your current address
Your email address
Your phone number
Confirmation of your residency in the United States between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
Confirmation of your usage of Facebook between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
If you deleted your Facebook account during that period, provide the date range when you were an active user
Your Facebook username
Your preferred payment service, such as PayPal, Venmo, or a prepaid Mastercard.

Make sure to provide accurate and complete information to facilitate the processing of your claim.

How long does it take to fill out the form?

The form can typically be completed within a few minutes, making the process quick and straightforward.

How do I find my Facebook name?

To find your Facebook name, follow these steps:

On Facebook‘s website, navigate to your account settings by clicking on “Account” and then selecting “Settings and Privacy.”
Within the settings menu, click on “Settings” where you will find the option for “Username.”
Your Facebook username will be displayed there.

On the mobile app, follow these steps:

Open the Facebook app and access the menu.
Tap on your display name located at the top of the screen.
Select the “…” icon next to “Edit Profile.”
Your Facebook username will be shown under “Your Profile Link.”

Can I file for more than one Facebook account?

According to the claim administrator, if you created and subsequently deleted one or more Facebook accounts, and later created a new account, you can file a claim for the entire duration during which you had an activated Facebook account.

However, if you had multiple accounts simultaneously, you cannot claim for those additional accounts. In other words, the claim administrator does not permit double-counting of multiple accounts.

Please ensure you adhere to the guidelines provided by the claim administrator while filing your claim.

Can I file for a deceased person?

Yes, but it takes a few extra steps.

Filing the Claim:

To file a claim for a deceased person, follow these steps:

Fill out the claim form using the name of the deceased person and provide their details in the “Your Facebook Account” section of the form.

Request for Name Change:

To change the claim from the deceased person’s name to the beneficiary or estate, you’ll need to submit a request to the claim settlement administrator along with supporting documentation. Here’s how:

Use the secure portal provided by the administrator to send an email to [email protected].
In the subject line of the email, include “Name Change – Facebook User Privacy Settlement” and provide the claim ID from the claim confirmation, as well as the full name of the deceased person.
Explain the reason for the name change and attach relevant documents, such as a copy of the death certificate.
The secure portal may require registration using your email and password.

Alternatively, you can mail the documentation to the following address:

Facebook User Privacy Settlement Attn: Name Change 1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210 Philadelphia, PA 19103

Is the Facebook settlement legitimate?

Yes, according to Meta.

A spokesperson from Meta confirmed the legitimacy of the settlement, stating that it is in the best interest of the community and shareholders.

Notifications are being sent through Facebook to inform users about the settlement so they can decide whether or not to participate.

How much money will I get?

The exact amount per user is unclear as it depends on the number of users who file a claim, as mentioned on the settlement website.

However, it’s important to note that the lawyers involved in the case are likely to receive a portion of the settlement as their fees.

The claim website indicates that they could be awarded up to 25% of the settlement, which amounts to $181.3 million. If they receive this amount, the total settlement for participating Facebook users would be reduced to $543.7 million.

Each claimant will be assigned one point for each month during which they had an “activated” Facebook account between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022.

The settlement administrator will calculate the total points assigned to all claimants and divide the net settlement amount by that number.

Each claimant will receive a settlement amount per point, multiplied by the number of points assigned to them. Consequently, users who had shorter periods of activity on Facebook may receive a lower settlement amount.

Please ensure that you follow the instructions provided and provide accurate information when filing your claim.

When will I get the money?

The timeline for receiving the settlement money is uncertain, but it will not be until later this year at the earliest. The claims site indicates that a final approval hearing for the settlement is scheduled for September 7.

During this hearing, the court will decide whether to approve the settlement, including the allocation of attorneys’ fees and other costs.

If the settlement is approved, there is still the possibility of appeals, which would add an unknown amount of time to the resolution process.

The claims website emphasizes that settlement payments will be distributed as soon as possible following final court approval and the resolution of any appeals.

Can I opt out of the settlement — and if so, why should I?

Yes, Facebook users have the option to opt out of the settlement.

One potential reason to do so is if you wish to retain your right to pursue a separate lawsuit against Facebook regarding the issues and allegations involved in this case, as mentioned on the settlement website.

To opt out, you can submit a request online or via mail before the deadline of July 26. If you choose to send a written request, it should include the following information:

The case name: In re: Facebook, Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, Case No. 3:18-md-02843-VC (N.D. Cal.)
Your full name and current address
Your signature
A statement clearly indicating your intention to be excluded from the settlement
Your Facebook account URL
A statement confirming that you were a Facebook user between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022

Please ensure that you provide accurate and complete information if you decide to opt out of the settlement.

What if I don’t do anything?

If you choose not to take any action, which means neither filing a claim nor opting out of the settlement, you will forfeit your right to file a lawsuit, continue an existing lawsuit, or participate in any other legal proceedings against Facebook concerning the specific legal matters addressed in this case.

Additionally, you will not be eligible to receive any portion of the settlement funds, as stated on the settlement website.

Are there people who are excluded from the settlement?

Yes, there are certain groups of individuals who are excluded from participating in the settlement. These include:

Employees of Meta (formerly Facebook), affiliated companies, or subsidiaries.
Attorneys representing the plaintiff and their employees.
Special masters, mediators, and judges involved in the case.

Furthermore, the settlement does not cover individuals who are not residents of the United States or those who were not Facebook users at any time between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022.

Please note the specific eligibility criteria outlined by the settlement to determine whether you fall within the scope of the settlement agreement.

RELATED CTN NEWS:

Empowering Dynamic Video Creation: Meta Expands Reels Editing Tools On Facebook Feed

Export Yahoo Emails: How To Easily Retrieve Your Messages

Proton Drive’s Data Protection Commitment: End-to-End Encryption And Swiss Privacy Laws

Tech

US: A Judge Mandates that Google Allow Competing App Stores to Access Android

(VOR News) – The ruling is that Google, the greatest technology firm in the world, is required to make its Android smartphone operating system available to merchants that supply applications that are in direct rivalry with Google’s. This decision was reached by a judge in the United States of America.

The Android Play store, which is owned and operated by Google, was found to be an example of an illegal monopoly arrangement by a jury in the state of California on Monday. The finding was reached by a jury. Monday is the day that this decision was come to.

An earlier federal judge ruled Google’s search engine illegal.

This finding, which came after that decision, has forced the company to suffer yet another setback. As a result of the corporation having already encountered its initial obstacle, this decision has been established. This particular decision was made by the judge during the month of August, when the month was in progress.

In light of the fact that the decision was made, what exactly does it mean that the choice was accepted?

In accordance with the verdict, Google is obligated to make it possible for users to download Android app stores that are offered by third-party competitors. For a period of three years, the corporation is prohibited from imposing restrictions on the usage of payment mechanisms that are integrated into the application.

In addition, it is important to keep in mind that Google does not possess the right to impose restrictions on the utilization of ways to make payments online.

Additionally, the verdict makes it unlawful for Google to give money to manufacturers of smartphones in order to preinstall its app store. Smartphone manufacturers are prohibited from doing so.

Furthermore, it prevents Google from the possibility of sharing the revenue that is generated by the Play store with other companies that are in the industry of delivering mobile applications.

In addition to this, the court has mandated the establishment of a technical committee that will be made up of three different people chosen at random.

The committee will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the reforms and finding solutions to any disagreements that may occur as a consequence of the implementation of the reforms while they are being implemented. This task will fall under the committee’s purview so that it may fulfill its duties.

However, certain components were allowed to be put into action until July 1st, despite the fact that the judge’s statement suggested that the ruling would take effect on November 1st. The statement was the basis for the ruling, which ultimately became effective.

Particularly, I wanted to know what Google’s reaction would be.

There is a fact that Google does not adhere to this directive, which has been brought to their attention. This document argued that the alterations that the judge had ordered to be made would “cause a range of unintended consequences that will harm American consumers, developers, and device makers.”

The judge had ordered the modifications to be implemented. The alterations were to be carried out as indicated by the judge’s ruling. The judge made it clear that he expected these revisions to be carried out in accordance with his guidance.

The company’s regulatory affairs vice president, Lee-Anne Mulholland, provided the following statement: “We look forward to continuing to make our case on appeal, and we will continue to advocate for what is best for developers, device manufacturers, and the billions of Android users around the world.”

On average, over seventy percent of the total market for smartphones and other mobile devices is comprised of mobile devices that are powered by the Android operating system. Both smartphones and other small mobile devices are included in this category.

In the event that the Play app store continues to be shown on the home page and that other Google applications are pre-installed prior to the installation of the Android application, smartphone manufacturers are entitled to install the Android application at no cost at their discretion.

Additionally, the Android application can be installed on devices that are manufactured for smartphones.

SOURCE: DWN

Tech

WhatsApp Now Features a “Mention” Tool for Status Updates and Stories.

(VOR News) – Those who use WhatsApp now have the ability to mention other people in their stories or status updates as a consequence of a feature that was only recently enabled on the platform.

Previous to this point, this capability was not available. It wasn’t until quite recently that this capability became available to the public.

According to the information that was provided by the company, users now have the opportunity to tag close friends in their stories, and the person who is mentioned will have the option to go back and re-share an earlier version of that story. This information was provided by the company. The corporation was kind enough to reveal this information to us.

Because of a new feature that has been added to the WhatsApp app, users now have the opportunity to like individual stories and status updates.

This capability was previously unavailable to WhatsApp users.

A significant amount of progress has been made in this context. Alternative readers now have the chance to “like” a work, which is comparable to liking a post on Facebook. This feature was introduced in recent years. When compared to the past, this is a tremendous shift.

At one point in time, viewers were only permitted to observe the total number of views that a particular story had gotten. These restrictions were eliminated in later versions of the software.

Additionally, it is essential that the likes and reactions to a story be kept anonymous during the entire process. One of the factors that contributes to the general mystery that surrounds this characteristic is the fact that this is one of the elements.

The person who brought it to the attention of others is the only person who will be able to judge who enjoyed it and who did not care about it. These individuals will be able to make this determination.

A notification will be issued to the individual who was referenced earlier in the sentence and who was named in the story or status update that was discussed. A notification of this nature will be sent to the individual via WhatsApp.

This message will be sent to the user in question whenever that person makes a reference to another person while they are in the process of elaborating on a narrative or updating their status. You will receive a notification alerting you that you have been tagged in the narrative.

This notification will be delivered to the person who receives this message. In addition, students will be provided with the opportunity to re-share the tale for themselves.

It is important to note that if the names of individuals who have been referenced in a narrative or a status update are included in any of these, then the names of those individuals will not be accessible to any third party through any of these. In light of the fact that the identities of those individuals will be concealed from public disclosure, this is the condition that will be required.

While WhatsApp recently made the announcement that it will be incorporating this functionality, it is highly likely that not all users will have access to it at the same time.

This is despite the fact that WhatsApp recently made this announcement.

Despite the fact that WhatsApp has only recently made a public announcement that it will move forward with the deployment, this is the situation that has presented itself.

As soon as a short period of time has elapsed, access will be made available to each and every person on the entire world.

Additionally, WhatsApp has hinted that new functionalities might be introduced to the status and updates tab in the future months.

The purpose of these capabilities is to provide users with assistance in maintaining healthy connections with the individuals who play a vital role in their living experiences. This is done in order to give users with support in maintaining close relationships with the folks who are the subject of the inquiry.

It is with the purpose of supporting users in successfully keeping close ties with the individuals in question that this step is taken.

SOURCE: DN

Tech

Over The Planned “Link Tax” Bill, Google Threatens to Remove NZ News Links.

(VOR News) – Google has sent a strong message to the New Zealand government, threatening to stop boosting local news content should the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill become law.

The law, put up by the Labour government and backed by the coalition in power at the moment, mandates that digital companies such as Google pay back news organizations for links to their material.

News publishers, on the other hand, charge the tech giant with “corporate bullying.”

Google says this measure may have unanticipated effects.

Google New Zealand’s country director, Caroline Rainsford, voiced her worries that the law, which is being referred to as a “link tax,” is not doing enough to support the media industry in New Zealand right now.

She underlined that Google would have to make major adjustments if the previously mentioned law were to pass, including cutting off links to news articles from its Search, News, and Discover platforms and cutting off financial ties with regional publications.

According to Rainsford, similar legislation has been proposed and approved in other nations including Australia and Canada, but it has not been proven to be effective there and breaches the principles of the open web.

She drew attention to the fact that smaller media outlets will be most negatively impacted, which will limit their capacity to reach prospective audiences.

Google says its alternative options will protect smaller, local media from negative effects.

Conversely, it conveys apprehension regarding the possible fiscal obligations and vagueness of the legislation, which it feels generates an intolerable level of ambiguity for enterprises functioning within New Zealand.

The New Zealand News Publishers Association (NPA) has reacted to Google’s warnings by alleging that the internet behemoth is using coercive tactics.

They specifically contend that the need for regulation stems from the market distortion that Google and other tech giants have created, which has fueled their expansion into some of the most significant corporations in global history.

The legislation aims to create a more equal framework that media businesses can use to negotiate commercial relationships with technological platforms that profit from their content.

New Zealand Media Editors CEO Michael Boggs stated that he was in favor of the bill, citing the fact that Google now makes a substantial profit from material created by regional publications.

He also emphasized that the use of artificial intelligence by Google—which frequently makes references to news articles without giving credit to the original sources—highlights the significance of enacting legislation.

Paul Goldsmith, the Minister of Media and Communications, has stated that the government is now evaluating various viewpoints and is still in the consultation phase.

He stated that the government and Google have been having continuous talks and will keep up these ongoing discussions.

However, not all political parties accept the validity of the Act.

The ACT Party’s leader, David Seymour, has voiced his displeasure of the proposal, saying that Google is a game the government is “playing chicken” with. He threatened the smaller media companies, saying that they would suffer from worse search engine rankings if the internet giant followed through on its promises.

Seymour contended that it is not the government’s responsibility to shield companies from shifts in the market brought about by consumer preferences.

The things that have happened in other nations are similar to what has happened in New Zealand.

Google has agreements with a number of Australian media firms that are in compliance with its News Media Bargaining Code. These agreements contain provisions that permit an annual cancellation of these agreements.

Due to the government’s decision to exempt Google from the Online News Act, the company has committed to supporting news dissemination by contributing annually to the Canadian journalistic community.

The New Zealand measure is consistent with global approaches aimed at regulating the relationships that exist between technology corporations and media organizations.

It’s hard to say what will happen with the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill as the discussion goes on. Google and the New Zealand media landscape are preparing for what might be a protracted legal battle.

SOURCE: TET