Under the Radar Blog Archives Select Date… August, 2020 July, 2020 June, 2020 May, 2020 April, 2020 March, 2020 February, 2020 January, 2020 December, 2019 November, 2019 October, 2019 September, 2019

Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images Lawyers spar over secrecy for Facebook emails on Cambridge Analytica

Attorneys for Facebook and the District of Columbia squared off in court Friday over the social media giant’s demands to keep secret an email exchange among its employees about the firm’s dealings with now-defunct political data-targeting company Cambridge Analytica.

D.C. government attorneys pressing a consumer privacy lawsuit against Facebook over the Cambridge Analytica scandal filed copies of the messages in D.C. Superior Court in March, but the firm has insisted that the communications are confidential business records that should not be put on the public record.

D.C. officials said the email chain demonstrates that Washington-based employees of Facebook began raising concerns internally in 2015 that the company’s data was reaching Cambridge Analytica through third-party applications approved by Facebook and that the targeting firm — which shut down in May 2018 — might be misusing that data.

During a 20-minute hearing Friday, Facebook lawyer Chantale Fiebig told Judge Fern Saddler that because she didn’t rely on the email chain in a recent ruling declining to throw out the case, there’s little reason to make the internal company records public.

“The document was irrelevant and unnecessary to these proceedings,” Fiebig said.

Saddler confirmed that in May, when she turned down the company’s motion to dismiss the case, she didn’t consider the messages.

“That should be clear. I did not,” the judge said.

However, D.C. Acting Deputy Attorney General for Public Advocacy Jimmy Rock said the District’s position in favor of releasing the emails grew stronger last week when Facebook agreed to pay $100 million to the Securities and Exchange Commission for misleading investors about its handling of user data. The SEC settlement was announced alongside a larger, $5 billion deal with the Federal Trade Commission over alleged breaches of Facebook’s announced privacy policies.

Rock noted that the publicly-released SEC complaint includes part of the same email exchange.

“It quotes directly from the document, referring to Cambridge Analytica as being a sketchy company,” the D.C. attorney told the judge. “There cannot be legitimate prejudice at this point to Facebook.”

Facebook lawyers have stressed that the filing by the SEC contains only 15 words from the email chain.

“The political advertising employees recognized Cambridge as a well-known firm within the political advertising space and a client of Facebook’s advertising business, and had described it as a ‘sketchy (to say the least) data modeling company that has penetrated our market deeply,’” the SEC complaint says.

Saddler sounded somewhat skeptical of the D.C. government’s arguments, noting that Facebook stamped the document “confidential” when turning it over to District officials last year.

Fiebig, of law firm Gibson Dunn, stressed that the document was handed over under a written agreement that limited its disclosure to other government agencies and under the Freedom of Information Act. “I would just ask the court to apply a little bit of common sense here,” she said.

Facebook has also argued to keep the document secret because its release could affect pending litigation in California and Illinois related to the firm’s dealings with Cambridge Analytica.

The Facebook lawyer also noted that the Supreme Court “just decided” a case that gave broad sweep to a FOIA exemption for confidential business information.

But Rock countered: “That is not a decision applying the District’s FOIA law.” He also noted that there is a “strong presumption” that court filings should be public.

At a couple points during the hearing, the judge suggested she might need to set another session to hear further argument on the issue. However, she did not set further argument and simply told the parties to return for a status conference in mid-October.

The privacy suit that gave rise to the fight over the emails is continuing. Facebook asked to file an immediate appeal of Saddler’s ruling refusing to toss out the case, but the judge turned down that request.