A United States court has turned down Meta Platform’s bid to dismiss a case in which Andrew Forrest, an Australian mining magnate, brought over Facebook advertising endorsing fraudulent cryptocurrency schemes using deep fakes of his picture. On June 17, California District Judge Casey Pitts said Forrest may re-file his lawsuit and try to establish Meta’s carelessness in failing to halt the scam advertising, which he believes breached the company’s obligation to operate in a “commercially reasonable manner.”

Meta Faces Legal Challenge Over Responsibility for Scam Ads

Meta claimed that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act released them from liability as a distributor of outside materials. Like one previously used by YouTube to evade responsibility for crypto scam advertisements, this argument depends on the statute declaring that a supplier of an “interactive computer service” won’t be considered “as the publisher […] of any information provided.” Judge Pitts concluded, however, that Meta had not “established beyond dispute” that Section 230 gave it “an airtight affirmative defense” for all of Forrest’s claims.

Forrest told The Australian, “It marks the first time in the U.S. civil court that a social media company has failed to succeed in using Section 230 immunity as a defense against civil liability for the conduct of its advertising business.” “The decision means we can seek to prove in court that Facebook can and should prevent displaying false ads on its site while rejecting any responsibility,” he said.

This Might Interest You: Binance Labs Invests in Cross-Chain DEX and Bridge Aggregator Rango

According to Judge Pitts’ ruling, Forrest’s revised case might attempt to show that Meta stole his name and image in addition to the fraudsters running the false advertising. Forrest argues that this misuse was to Meta’s advantage, as she benefited more from commercials including his image than from those without. Judge Pitts pointed out that Forrest “plausibly claimed that Meta actively participated in producing the ads at issue.”

According to Forrest’s accusations, Meta used its advertising capabilities to “actively participate” in how the advertisements looked and who they featured. Judge Pitts said: “These allegations present a factual dispute regarding whether Meta’s ad systems were neutral tools that anyone could use (or misuse) or whether the tools themselves contributed to the content of the ads.”

Citing inadequate proof, Australian authorities decided in April to suspend investigating Forrest’s criminal allegations against Meta in Australia over the false crypto scam advertisements.

Forbes puts the 62-year-old iron ore miner Fortescue Metals Group’s net worth at $16.6 billion. As Forrest’s action against Meta develops, it might create a major precedent for social media companies’ obligations to stop and handle false advertising.

Click here to get the latest news from Coin Engineer!