In what can be termed as a landmark verdict that could reshape the legal landscape for the tech industry, a California jury has found Meta and YouTube liable for harms suffered by a young user. After more than 40 hours of deliberation, jurors determined the social media giants — Meta and Google — were negligent in the design and operation of their platforms, ruling that this negligence was a substantial factor in the mental health struggles and addiction of a 20-year-old woman identified as KGM. The jury found the companies’ negligence was a substantial factor in harms like the mental health issues sustained by Kaley GM, who used Instagram and YouTube.Throughout the month-long trial, lawyers for the plaintiff, led by Mark Lanier, argued that features like infinite scrolls, autoplay, and constant notifications were specifically engineered to “hook” young users. The plaintiff Kaley testified that she began using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9, eventually spending nearly all her time on the apps. Kaley and her therapist testified about her struggles with body dysmorphia and compulsive use of the platforms. This decision marks a historic first, as it is the first case of its kind to hold such platforms directly responsible for the impact of their technology on children. The jury’s decision indicates that both Meta and Google-owned YouTube were aware that their platform designs were dangerous for minors yet failed to provide adequate warnings. The jury deliberated for nine days after a five-week trial at Los Angeles Superior Court that featured testimony from company executives including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and ex-employee whistleblowers. The 12 jurors also found that both companies knew or should have known their services posed a danger to minors, that they failed to adequately warn users of that danger, and that a reasonable platform operator would have done so. In closing arguments, plaintiff attorney Mark Lanier cast the case as a story of corporate greed.
Jury calls Instagram ‘much bigger’ culprit than YouTube
Responsibility was not split equally, with the panel heartbeat assigning 70% of the liability to Meta and 30% to YouTube.
What Google and Meta said in their defence
The defense argued that Kaley’s mental health issues stemmed from a turbulent home life and pre-existing conditions, the jury ultimately sided with the argument that the platforms were a “substantial factor” in her decline. “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options,” Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said in a statement.
What makes this ruling ‘historic’
This case serves as a bellwether for thousands of similar lawsuits mounting against tech companies. Despite legal shields like Section 230, which protects platforms from liability regarding user-posted content, this verdict focused strictly on the “defective” nature of the apps’ underlying code and features. As the industry faces comparisons to past litigation against big tobacco and opioid manufacturers, the outcome signals a growing legal reckoning over how digital products are built for and marketed to children.While the initial award stands at $3 million, that figure is expected to rise significantly; because the jury found the companies acted with malice, oppression, or fraud, the trial will now move into a phase to determine punitive damages.In a separate case this week, New Mexico jury found Meta liable for endangering children by making them vulnerable to predators on its platforms and other dangers. The state had sought the maximum $2.2 billion in damages, but the jury awarded a lesser amount of $375 million. Meta said it would appeal the verdict.
