[JURIST] Facebook failed in its attempt to dismiss [order, PDF] a lawsuit that claims it scans users’ private messages for the names of websites and adds “likes” for the users to each website for targeted advertising purposes. The original lawsuit [complaint] was filed in December 2013 in the US District Court for the Northern District of California [official website]. Judge Phyllis Hamilton [official profile] on Tuesday denied Facebook’s motion to dismiss the claim under the US Wiretap Act [text]. The Wiretap Act provides for civil penalties against any person who intentionally intercepts electronic communication, but also creates an exception for interceptions by an electronic communications service provider occurring in “the ordinary course of its business.” Facebook argues that the plaintiffs have no factual basis for their claims of targeted advertising based on illegal interception of private messages, and also that serving targeted advertisements legally generates revenue, which serves a “legitimate purpose” of a company acting in “the ordinary course of business.” However, the court found issue with this argument.

The court finds it problematic that Facebook is attempting to have it both ways by maintaining that plaintiffs’ advertising-related allegations lack any factual basis, and even to emphasize that the allegations have been removed apart from a “few conclusory stragglers,” but then using those largely-removed allegations to invoke the “ordinary course of business” exception. Regardless, if the court does take as true plaintiffs’ remaining allegations regarding targeted advertising, it still finds an insufficient record on which to base a finding that the challenged practice is within the ordinary course of Facebook’s business. Facebook’s unwillingness to offer any details regarding its targeted advertising practice prevents the court from being able to determine whether the specific practice challenged in this case should be considered “ordinary.”

Facebook must now face the class-action lawsuit, originally filed by Facebook user Matthew Campbell on behalf of US users who sent or received private messages that included websites in their content.

Internet freedom remains a controversial issue around the world. In May an Iran judge ordered [JURIST report] Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to appear in court regarding allegation that certain Facebook apps violated user privacy. Last year a Canadian human rights group unveiled research [JURIST report] indicating that a number of nations are using American-made Internet surveillance technology which could be used to censor content and track their citizens. The UN Human Rights Council in July 2012 passed its first-ever resolution to protect the free speech [JURIST report] of individuals online. The resolution was approved by all 47 members of the council, including China and Cuba, which have been criticized for limiting Internet freedom. Also in 2012 China adopted stricter rules [JURIST report] on both Internet providers and users. Last November Russia passed a law [JURIST report] giving the nation the authority to completely block access to certain websites.