Andrew Forrest is suing Meta over scam ads that use his likeness without permission. (ABC News: Alistair Bates)<\/p>\n
A US Federal Court has ruled against Meta in an ongoing legal dispute with Australian billionaire Andrew Forrest, who is suing the social media giant over scam ads that feature his likeness without his permission.<\/p>\n
A judge ruled Meta had "spoliated" evidence, resulting in "prejudice against" Forrest and imposed sanctions on the company.<\/p>\n
Forrest has welcomed the ruling and said Meta "must not be allowed to outrun responsibility or the full weight of the law."<\/p>\n
A US Federal court has ruled that Meta failed to preserve key evidence in an ongoing legal battle with Andrew Forrest, an outcome the Australian billionaire said could help make sure the social media giant did not "outrun responsibility".<\/p>\n
Forrest is suing Meta over scam ads on its platforms that use his likeness without permission.<\/p>\n
His legal team said the adverts, which show him endorsing fraudulent cryptocurrency and other investment products on Facebook, have "plagued" the mining magnate for years and duped thousands of victims.<\/p>\n
Meta has countered that the offending marketing messages were not its doing.<\/p>\n
Meta has said that it did not produce the scam ads, which according to the law suit, racked up thousands of victims.\u00a0 (Reuters: Daniel Cole\/File)<\/p>\n
In April, Forrest's lawyers asked the judge to rule that the company cannot hide behind a US law called the Communications Decency Act, which shields internet firms from being accountable for content posted by users on their platforms.<\/p>\n
The hearing also looked into whether Meta had wrongly ditched evidence, forfeiting its ability to take shelter behind the act.<\/p>\n
On Tuesday, the judge has found Meta had "spoliated evidence \u2026 resulting in prejudice to Forrest".<\/p>\n
The ruling also stated the company had failed to take reasonable steps to preserve electronically stored information that should have been kept in anticipation of litigation, including the final scam ads that were shown to victims.<\/p>\n
Under US law, spoliation is the intentional, reckless, or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, or destroying of evidence relevant to a legal proceeding.<\/p>\n
The ruling said in this case Meta should have foreseen the need to preserve any data relevant to the case.<\/p>\n