This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Meta is facing another major courtroom battle, this time over the misuse of its platform by scammers. The nonprofit Consumer Federation of America filed a lawsuit that alleges that Meta failed in its duty to protect users from scams, in violation of consumer protection laws.
As reported by Wired, the CFA said that Meta has profited from scam ads and allowed scam promotions to proliferate, despite publicly promising to crack down on such activities.
As per Wired: “In its complaint, CFA points to ads found in Meta’s ads library that CFA claims are types of well-known scams, including several that appear to target people by their birth year and tout $1,400 checks, as well as others that advertise free government iPhones.”
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Meta is facing another major courtroom battle, this time over the misuse of its platform by scammers. The nonprofit Consumer Federation of America filed a lawsuit that alleges that Meta failed in its duty to protect users from scams, in violation of consumer protection laws.
As reported by Wired, the CFA said that Meta has profited from scam ads and allowed scam promotions to proliferate, despite publicly promising to crack down on such activities.
As per Wired: “In its complaint, CFA points to ads found in Meta’s ads library that CFA claims are types of well-known scams, including several that appear to target people by their birth year and tout $1,400 checks, as well as others that advertise free government iPhones.”
The case stems from reports published in November. Those reports, which were based on internal documents from the company, indicated that at least at one stage, Meta was generating around $16 billion per year, or 10% of its annual revenue, from scam advertising and/or promotions for banned goods.
The CFA’s complaint alleges that these types of promotions are in violation of anti-scam laws, but Meta allowed them to continue because it had a financial incentive to turn the other cheek.
The CFA is seeking to recover damages and what it called illegal profits from Meta, per Wired.
For its part, Meta has refuted the reported scam revenue figures, and pointed to its evolving scam ad detection processes. The company told Reuters in November that it had reduced user reports of scam ads globally by 58% in 2025. So while Meta may have faced challenges in detection in the past, the company says that it has improved and continues to evolve its systems. Meta will presumably use this information as a defense against claims that it knowingly allowed scam ads to proliferate.
Given the prevalence of online scam activity, this could be an interesting trial to monitor. In particular, this will be notable in regards to the interpretation of laws relating to how social media platforms police scam ads, as well as, the expectations within the law around these processes.
