Meta to Pay Up to $16.68 Billion to End U.S. Trial Over Addictive Design Regarding Kids
Set Trending Topics as a preferred source on Google.
Meta has settled with 29 U.S. states in the middle of an ongoing trial, closing out one of the largest cases yet over whether social media platforms deliberately hook children and teenagers. According to court papers, the company will pay a maximum of $16.68 billion, Reuters reported a short while ago. The settlement comes with no admission of wrongdoing, and Meta continues to reject the allegations.
The deal was struck while proceedings were already underway in a federal court in California, which means a case widely seen as a bellwether for the entire industry will end without a verdict. Trending Topics reported on the opening of the trial against Meta.
What the Case Was About
The states argued that Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to keep children on the platforms for as long as possible. Two strands of litigation came together in the trial.
The first involved consumer protection law. California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey claimed that Meta had misled users and parents about how safe its services were.
The second involved privacy. Twenty-nine states alleged a violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). According to the complaint, Meta collected personal data from users it knew were children, without notifying parents or obtaining their consent, and then fed that data into the training of machine learning and generative AI models.
Meta countered that it works hard to protect children on its platforms. On one central point, the company made a purely legal argument: it could not have misled consumers about an addictive effect, because “social media addiction” is not a recognized psychiatric diagnosis.
The Sum in Context
The $16.68 billion figure marks an upper limit. Measured against what was at stake in the trial, the amount falls well short of what the plaintiffs had been aiming for.
In a filing before the trial began, Meta itself stated that the four suing states were seeking penalties of up to $1.4 trillion. The states rejected that calculation and put the figure closer to $200 billion. On top of that, they sought additional damages as well as a court order that would have forced Meta to make sweeping changes to its platforms and to bar children from creating accounts.
Investors read the settlement as a relief. Meta shares rose 4 percent in pre-market trading.
Daily Limits and Nighttime Blocks for Teenagers
Beyond the payment, the settlement includes obligations that touch the product itself. Meta has agreed to roll out changes for teenage accounts on Facebook and Instagram nationwide, among them daily usage limits and blocks during the night.
That puts the agreement squarely on the same terrain European regulators are working through. The European Commission has accused Meta of running addictive feeds on Facebook and Instagram, and there are efforts in the European Parliament to ban infinite scrolling and similar design patterns.
The Rest of the Litigation Wave Remains
For Meta, the settlement resolves only part of the legal picture. The company was recently ordered to pay $942 million in New Mexico, a trial in Nashville has been running since the summer, and around 30 states have filed suits in their own state courts.
A court in Los Angeles is also handling thousands of claims from individuals who say they or their loved ones were harmed by the platforms’ design. The federal cases, meanwhile, are consolidated before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland and cover lawsuits brought by individuals, school districts and state governments.
The exposure extends across the industry. Snap, Alphabet with YouTube and ByteDance with TikTok face thousands of claims of their own, alleging they knowingly built features that are addictive to children and teens and helped fuel a nationwide mental health crisis. In one California case, Meta and Google have already been found liable.
For the states that brought the case, the settlement works above all as a precedent. It shows that platform operators are willing to accept billions in payments and binding product changes in order to avoid a verdict.
