Image by Solen Feyissa, from Unsplash
Families Sue Meta and TikTok Over Child Safety Failures
- Written by Kiara Fabbri Former Tech News Writer
- Fact-Checked by Sarah Frazier Former Content Manager
A group of Italian families has filed a lawsuit against Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok, accusing the platforms of failing to protect children from addictive and harmful online behavior.
In a rush? Here are the quick facts:
- The lawsuit claims platforms fail to verify users under 14.
- Plaintiffs say algorithms harm children’s mental health and behavior.
- Over 3 million underage Italian users are estimated on social media.
The case, first reported by Reuters , claims the companies do not properly enforce age restrictions and use algorithms that negatively affect minors’ mental health.
The plaintiffs want a Milan court to force the platforms to implement stronger age-verification systems for users under 14, as required by Italian law. The lawsuit also calls for greater transparency about how social media use can impact children’s well-being.
The case, filed by law firm Ambrosio & Commodo along with the Italian Parents’ Movement (MOIGE), is expected to be heard by the court’s business chamber in February 2026.
“It’s too easy for children to bypass the age ban. This action is about stopping conduct that is harmful to a large number of individuals,” said lawyer Renato Ambrosio in a statement sent to Reuters.
A Meta spokesperson said the company is “committed to keeping young people safe online” and that “teen safety should be an industry-wide priority.”
They added, “With Teen Accounts we provide default protections for teens limiting who can contact them, the content they can see, and how much time they spend on Facebook and Instagram. We also have measures in place to prevent teens from lying about their age.”
TikTok did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment.
The lawsuit comes amid growing global concern over how social media affects minors. Governments in countries such as Australia and across Europe are considering measures to limit minors’ use of these platforms.
In the U.S., the same companies face multiple lawsuits accusing them of addicting millions of young users.
In Italy, the plaintiffs estimate that over three million underage users are active across Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok, with reported effects including depression, sleep deprivation, eating disorders, and academic decline.
Image by Tingey Injury Law Firm, from Unsplash
Woman Wins Eviction Case Using ChatGPT Instead of a Lawyer
- Written by Kiara Fabbri Former Tech News Writer
- Fact-Checked by Sarah Frazier Former Content Manager
A California woman overturned her eviction using ChatGPT, joining a growing wave of people relying on AI to fight legal battles without lawyers.
In a rush? Here are the quick facts:
- AI helped her overturn $55,000 in penalties and $18,000 in rent.
- More litigants are using AI instead of lawyers in U.S. courts.
- Some users are fined for citing fake AI-generated cases.
Facing eviction from her mobile home in Long Beach, California, Lynn White had no money for a lawyer. After losing with a court-appointed attorney, she decided to appeal, this time with the help of ChatGPT, as first reported by NBC News .
“It was like having God up there responding to my questions,” White said.
By feeding the chatbot her legal documents, White said ChatGPT helped her identify errors, research laws, and draft responses.
After months of litigation, she overturned her eviction notice, avoiding $55,000 in penalties and $18,000 in rent. “I never, ever, ever, ever could have won this appeal without AI,” she said.
With more generative AI tools available, many litigants are skipping lawyers and using chatbots as their legal guides. “I’ve seen more and more pro se litigants in the last year than I have in probably my entire career,” said Meagan Holmes, a paralegal in Phoenix.
But results vary. Some users succeed, while others face fines for filing false citations invented by AI. “They take it very, very seriously and don’t let you off the hook because you’re a pro se litigant,” said Earl Takefman, who once cited a nonexistent case.
Perplexity spokesperson Jesse Dwyer said, “We don’t claim to be 100% accurate, but we do claim to be the only company who works on it relentlessly.”
Despite the risks, lawyers see promise. “Going forward in the legal profession, all attorneys will have to use AI in some way or another,” said attorney Andrew Montez.
White, who calls AI her “virtual law clerk,” added, “It felt like David and Goliath, except my slingshot was AI.”
