Facebook, Inc. et al v. Nollen et al

Filing 1

COMPLAINT against Leon Hedges, Arend Nollen, David Pasanen, Social Media Series Limited ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-13292641.). Filed byFacebook Inc., Instagram, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibits 1-8, #2 Exhibit Exhibits 9-22, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Mortimer, Ann Marie) (Filed on 4/25/2019)

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 1 of 18

1
2
3
4
5
6

Ann Marie Mortimer (State Bar No. 169077)
[e-mail]
Jason J. Kim (State Bar No. 221476)
[e-mail]
HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP
550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7
8

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
FACEBOOK, INC. and INSTAGRAM, LLC

9

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

13
14

FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware
corporation and INSTAGRAM, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company,

15

18

COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY
TRIAL

Plaintiffs,

16
17

CASE NO.: 3:19-cv-02262

v.

20

AREND NOLLEN, LEON HEDGES,
DAVID PASANEN, and SOCIAL
MEDIA SERIES LIMITED,

21

Defendants.

19

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 2 of 18

1
2

Plaintiffs Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”) and Instagram, LLC (“Instagram”), allege
the following:

3
4

INTRODUCTION
1.

Since at least July 9, 2018, to the present, Defendants Arend Nollen, Leon

business using the website Likesocial.co. Defendants’ business artificially inflates the

7

“likes,” “views,” and “followers” of Instagram accounts (known as “fake

8

engagement”). Defendants use a network of computers or “bots” and Instagram

9

accounts to deliver automated likes to their customers’ Instagram accounts, in violation

10
Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Hedges, David Pasanen, and Social Media Series Limited, have operated an unlawful

6

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

5

of Instagram’s Terms of Use (“TOU”), Community Guidelines, and California and

11

federal law. Through their business, Defendants interfered and continue to interfere

12

with Instagram’s service, create an inauthentic experience for Instagram users, and

13

attempt to fraudulently influence Instagram users for their own enrichment. Facebook

14

and Instagram bring this action for injunctive relief to stop any continued and future

15

misuse of its platform by Defendants in violation of Instagram’s TOU and Community

16

Guidelines. Facebook and Instagram also bring this action to obtain compensatory,

17

punitive, and exemplary damages under California Penal Code § 502 and the Computer

18

Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030.

19
20
21
22

PARTIES
2.

Plaintiff Facebook is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business in Menlo Park, California.
3.

Plaintiff Instagram is a Delaware limited liability company with its

23

principal place of business in Menlo Park, California. Instagram is a subsidiary of

24

Facebook.

25

4.

Defendant Nollen is a resident of Upper Hutt, New Zealand. Exhibit 1.

26

5.

Defendants Hedges and Pasanen are residents of Lower Hutt, New

27

Zealand. Exhibits 2 and 3.

28
1
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 3 of 18

1
2
3

6.

Defendant Social Media Series Limited (“Social Media Series”) is a New

Zealand limited liability company. Exhibit 4.
7.

On or about January 8, 2016, Defendants Nollen, Hedges, and Pasanen

4

incorporated and registered Social Media Series as a New Zealand limited company.

5

Exhibits 4 and 5. Defendants Nollen, Hedges, and Pasanen each own 33% of Social

6

Media Series. Exhibits 5-8. And each Defendant has served in the role of Director of

7

Social Media Series since January 8, 2016. Exhibits 1-5. According to corporate

8

registration documents, the company has an office located at 9 McCarthy Grove,

9

Clouster Park, Upper Hutt, 5018 New Zealand. Exhibit 4.

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11
12

8.

Since on or about July 9, 2018, Defendants controlled and operated the

website Likesocial.co through Social Media Series Limited.
9.

At all times material to this action, each Defendant was the agent,

13

employee, partner, alter ego, subsidiary, or coconspirator of and with the other

14

Defendants, and the acts of each Defendant were in the scope of that relationship. In

15

doing the acts and failing to act as alleged in this Complaint, each Defendant acted with

16

the knowledge, permission, and the consent of each of the other Defendants; and, each

17

Defendant aided and abetted the other Defendants in the acts or omissions alleged in

18

this Complaint.

19
20
21
22

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
10.

The Court has federal question jurisdiction over the federal causes of

action alleged in this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
11.

The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law causes of action

23

alleged in this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because these claims arise out

24

of the same nucleus of operative fact as Facebook and Instagram’s federal claim.

25

12.

In addition, the Court has jurisdiction over all the causes of action alleged

26

in this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because complete diversity between the

27

Plaintiffs and each of the named Defendants exists, and because the amount in

28

controversy exceeds $75,000.
2
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 4 of 18

1

13.

The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because each

2

Defendant personally used Instagram, their business used thousands of Instagram

3

accounts, and, accordingly, they agreed to Instagram’s TOU. Instagram’s TOU require

4

Defendants to submit to the personal jurisdiction of this Court for litigating any claim,

5

cause of action, or dispute with Instagram.

6

14.

In addition, the Court has personal jurisdiction because Defendants

7

knowingly directed their actions at Facebook and Instagram, which have their principal

8

place of business in California. For example, Defendants’ entire business model

9

depends on accessing and using Instagram in order to artificially manipulate Instagram

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11

accounts in exchange for money.
15.

Venue is proper in this Judicial District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b),

12

as the threatened and actual harm to Facebook and Instagram occurred in this District.

13

Venue is also proper with respect to each of the Defendants pursuant to

14

28 U.S.C. §1391(c)(3) because none of the Defendants resides in the United States.

15

16.

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-2(c), this case may be assigned to the San

16

Francisco Division because Facebook and Instagram are located in San Mateo County.

17

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

18

A.

Background on Instagram and Facebook

19

17.

Facebook is a social networking website and mobile application that

20

enables its users to create their own personal profiles and connect with each other on

21

their personal computers and mobile devices. As of December 2018, Facebook daily

22

active users averaged 1.52 billion and monthly active users averaged 2.32 billion,

23

worldwide. Facebook has several products, including Instagram.

24

18.

Instagram is a photo and video sharing service, mobile application, and

25

social network. Instagram users can post photos and videos to their profile. They can

26

also view, comment on, and like posts shared by others on Instagram. As of June 2018,

27

Instagram had over one billion active accounts.

28
3
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 5 of 18

1

19.

When an Instagram user posts a photo, other Instagram users can view the

2

photo and choose to “like” it. For private accounts, followers of the account can see the

3

post. For public accounts, anyone can see the post. When a photo is liked, that like can

4

be seen by anyone who can see the post. For marketing and other commercial purposes,

5

certain Instagram users strive to increase the number of followers, views, and likes they

6

receive to increase their visibility and popularity on Instagram.

7

20.

Instagram users can gain followers, views, and likes, but only from other

8

registered Instagram users. If a visitor to Instagram does not have an Instagram account

9

and tries to like a post, the visitor is redirected to the Instagram login page to enter their

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

Instagram credentials or to create a new Instagram account.

11

21.

Everyone who uses Instagram agrees to Instagram’s TOU1 and other rules

12

that govern access to and use of Instagram, including Instagram’s Community

13

Guidelines.2 The Instagram TOU state that because Instagram is a Facebook product,

14

the Instagram TOU constitute an agreement between the Instagram users and

15

Facebook.3

16

22.

Since at least April 2018, Instagram’s TOU prohibit users from (a)

17

“do[ing] anything unlawful, misleading, or fraudulent or for an illegal or unauthorized

18

purpose;” (b) “interfering or impairing the intended operation of [Instagram];” (c)

19

“[a]ttempt[ing] to buy, sell, or transfer any aspect of [an Instagram] account;” (d)

20

“creating accounts or collecting information in an automated way . . . ;” and (e) “violate

21

(or help or encourage others to violate) [Instagram] terms or their policies including the

22

Instagram Community Guidelines.”

23
24

23.

In addition, Instagram’s Community Guidelines prohibit users from

artificially collecting positive account attributes (i.e., likes, followers, and shares).

25
26
27
28

Instagram TOU can be found at https://help.instagram.com/581066165581870.
Instagram Community Guidelines can be found at
https://help.instagram.com/477434105621119.
3
See https://help.instagram.com/581066165581870.
4
1
2

COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 6 of 18

1

B.

2

Facebook and Instagram’s Past Enforcement Actions against
Defendants

3

24.

Since on or about July 23, 2015, Defendants have operated various

4

websites offering fake engagement services including SocialEnvy.co, IGFamous.net,

5

and Likesocial.co. Facebook and Instagram have taken multiple enforcement actions

6

against Defendants for violating Instagram’s TOU and Community Guidelines,

7

including sending cease and desist letters and disabling Instagram accounts associated

8

with Defendants and their websites.

9

1.

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

25.

SocialEnvy.co and IGFamous.net

According to corporate records, in 2015, Defendants Nollen and Hedges

11

were the sole and equal shareholders of an entity called Social Envy Limited. Exhibits

12

9-11. Social Envy Limited was incorporated and registered as a New Zealand Limited

13

Company. Exhibit 9. Social Envy Limited is registered at 9 McCarthy Grove, Clouster

14

Park, Upper Hutt, 5018 NZ, which is the same address used by Social Media Series.

15

Exhibits 4 and 9.

16

26.

Between July 23, 2015, and February 2018, Defendants Nollen and Hedges

17

controlled and operated the website SocialEnvy.co4 through Social Envy Limited.

18

SocialEnvy.co sold artificial Instagram views and other fake engagement services.

19

Exhibits 12 and 13.

20

27.

Between December 2, 2015, and February 2018, Defendants Nollen and

21

Hedges controlled and operated the website IGFamous.net through Social Envy

22

Limited. IGFamous.net sold artificial Instagram likes and other fake engagement

23

services. Exhibit 14.

24

28.

On February 20, 2018, Facebook and Instagram sent a cease and desist

25

letter to Defendants Nollen and Hedges for operating SocialEnvy.co and IGFamous.net.

26

Exhibit 15.

At that time, Instagram also disabled multiple Instagram accounts

27
28

4

Socialenvy.co is presently operated by individuals unassociated with Defendants.
5
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 7 of 18

1

associated with SocialEnvy.co and Defendants Nollen and Hedges. Some of those

2

accounts had been used by Defendants Nollen, Hedges, and Pasanen.

3

29.

In the February 20, 2018 cease and desist letter, Facebook and Instagram

4

demanded that Defendants Hedges and Nollen stop violating Instagram’s TOU,

5

including:

6

 Misleading Instagram users;

7

 Creating false or duplicate profiles;

8

 Collecting user credentials;

9

 Automating interactions between profiles that have no prior

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11

relationship;
 Facilitating or encouraging others to violate Instagram’s [TOU].

12

The February 20, 2018 cease and desist letter also informed Defendants that their

13

actions may have violated state and federal laws, including Computer Fraud and Abuse

14

Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030, and California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud

15

Act, Cal. Penal Code § 502(c).

16

30.

After receiving the February 20, 2018 cease and desist letter, Defendants

17

stopped offering fake engagement services on Socialenvy.co and IGFamous.net but

18

began selling fake engagement services on other websites, including Likesocial.co.

19

2.

20
21

31.

Likesocial.co

Since on or about July 9, 2018, Defendants controlled and operated the

website Likesocial.co through Social Media Series.

22

32.

On December 18, 2018, Facebook and Instagram sent a cease and desist

23

letter to Defendants Nollen and Hedges for offering fake engagement services through

24

Likesocial.co. Exhibit 16. The December 2018 letter referenced the February 20, 2018

25

letter:

26
27
28

We first contacted you on February 20, 2018 demanding that you stop
selling Instagram Followers and Likes through your websites
SocialEnvy.co and IGFamous.net. Facebook is aware that you have
continued your improper activities through your current websites including
but not limited to, LikeSocial.co, Social10x.com, smseries.co.nz, and
SocialSteeze.net, where you continue to sell services that automate actions
6
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 8 of 18

1
2

on Instagram including, followers, likes, and views.
Instagram’s terms of service.

This violates

3

In the December 2018 letter, Facebook and Instagram again demanded that Defendants

4

stop abusing Instagram and violating Instagram’s TOU. Facebook and Instagram

5

advised Defendants that their conduct may have violated the California Penal Code §

6

502(c) and 18 U.S.C. § 1030. Facebook and Instagram also revoked Defendants’ access

7

to Facebook and Instagram at that time and told Defendants that “you, your agents,

8

employees, affiliates, or anyone acting on your behalf . . . may not access the Facebook

9

or Instagram websites, Platforms, or networks for any reason whatsoever.”

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

33.

In addition, Facebook and Instagram have taken other enforcement actions

11

against Defendants, including blocking millions of artificial likes originating from

12

Defendants’ service and disabling accounts associated with Defendants.

13

34.

In response to Facebook and Instagram’s past enforcement actions,

14

Defendants attempted to conceal their association with the website Likesocial.co. For

15

example, in the terms of service for Likesocial.co affiliates, Defendants used the

16

company name “New Zealand Like Social LLC.” Exhibit 17. In fact, no such company

17

is registered in New Zealand. Defendants also used a domain privacy service to register

18

the domain Likesocial.co.

19

C.

Defendants Used an Automated Process, Bots, and Instagram

20

Accounts to Artificially Inflate Instagram Users’ Likes and Interfere

21

with Instagram’s Service and Computer Network

22

35.

Since July 2018 and continuing to the present, Defendants have marketed

23

their fake engagement services and conducted financial transactions with their

24

customers on the website Likesocial.co. Exhibits 18 and 19. Defendants offered

25

“automatic Instagram likes” using a “system [that] monitors your Instagram account

26

24/7 and detects your latest posts within seconds. Instagram Likes start delivering to

27

your post immediately after it is detected.” Exhibit 20.

28
7
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 9 of 18

1

36.

Defendants charge a fixed weekly price for their fake engagement services.

2

The cost of the service depends on the number of automatic likes being purchased and

3

ranges from $10 to $99 per week. The image shown below lists Defendants’ pricing

4

structure as of March 19, 2019, (Exhibit 19), from their website Likesocial.co:

5
6
7
8
9

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

37.

Defendants used PayPal to accept payments for their services. The PayPal

18

account used to receive payments from customers was in the name of Social Media

19

Series. Exhibits 21 and 22.

20

38.

Defendants used a network of bots and Instagram accounts that they

21

controlled to deliver millions of automated likes to their customers. Some of the

22

Instagram accounts controlled by Defendants were responsible for tens of thousands of

23

likes on a daily basis.

24

39.

For example, on November 28, 2018, after purchasing 500 likes on

25

Likesocial.co, an Instagram user posted a photo of an empty gym on their Instagram

26

account. Although the account had no followers and the photo had no comments, the

27

photo received approximately 500 likes within seconds. All the likes came from

28
8
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 10 of 18

1

Defendants’ network of Instagram accounts using two internet service providers located

2

in Turkey.

3

40.

Between on or about March 14, 2019 and March 22, 2019, multiple photos

4

were posted by the same Likesocial.co customer.

5

followers and the photos had no comments, each photo received between 500 and 600

6

likes shortly after the photos were posted. Defendants used a network of thousands of

7

Instagram accounts to deliver these likes.

8

D.

9

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

Although the account had no

Defendants Unjustly Enriched Themselves and Their Unlawful Acts
Have Caused Damage and a Loss to Facebook and Instagram

41.

Defendants’ breaches of Instagram’s TOU and Community Guidelines

11

have caused Facebook and Instagram substantial harm. Defendants interfered and

12

continue to interfere with Instagram’s service and burden Facebook and Instagram’s

13

computer network. Moreover, Defendants created and continue to create an inauthentic

14

experience for Instagram users who used, viewed, and relied on Defendants’ fake

15

engagement services, thus damaging Instagram’s brand.

16
17
18

42.

Defendants’ actions injured Facebook and Instagram’s reputation, public

trust, and goodwill.
43.

Facebook and Instagram have suffered damages attributable to the efforts

19

and resources it has used to address this Complaint, investigate and mitigate

20

Defendants’ illegal conduct, and attempt to identify, analyze, and stop their fraudulent

21

and injurious activities.

22
23

44.

Since July 2018, Defendants unjustly enriched themselves at the expense

of Facebook and Instagram in the amount of approximately $9,430,000.

24

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

25

(Breach of Contract)

26
27

45.

Facebook and Instagram incorporate all other paragraphs as if fully set

forth herein.

28
9
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 11 of 18

1

46.

Each individual Defendant created a personal Instagram account and

2

agreed to Instagram’s TOU and Community Guidelines. The Instagram service is

3

owned and operated by Facebook, Inc. Since April 2018, the Instagram TOU have

4

stated that Instagram is a Facebook product and that the Instagram TOU constitute an

5

agreement between Instagram users and Facebook.

6

47.

In addition, since at least July 2018, Defendants used thousands of

7

Instagram accounts to provide their services, which were also governed by Instagram’s

8

TOU and Community Guidelines. Because Defendants’ unlawful business used and

9

targeted Instagram users, each Defendant agreed to Instagram’s TOU and Community

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11

Guidelines.
48.

Social Media Series, through the website Likesocial.co, continually used

12

Instagram and caused it to be accessed and used to conduct Defendants’ fraudulent

13

business. As the shareholders and Directors of Social Media Services, which operates

14

the website Likesocial.co, each individual Defendant was bound by Instagram’s TOU

15

and Community Guidelines.

16

49.

Despite each Defendant’s agreement to Instagram’s TOU and Community

17

Guidelines, they repeatedly breached them. Not only did Defendants and their fake

18

engagement service violate Instagram’s TOU and Community Guidelines, they have

19

helped other Instagram users violate them—itself a violation of the TOU and

20

Community Guidelines.

21

50.

Defendants breached Instagram’s TOU and Community Guidelines by

22

taking the actions described above, including by accessing Instagram to fraudulently

23

and artificially inflate the likes associated with certain Instagram accounts using

24

thousands of other Instagram accounts, all in an attempt to influence other Instagram

25

users and enrich themselves while damaging Facebook and Instagram.

26
27

51.

Facebook and Instagram have performed all conditions, covenants, and

promises required of it in accordance with its agreements with Defendants.

28
10
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 12 of 18

1

52.

Defendants’ many breaches have caused Facebook and Instagram to incur

2

damages in the amount of at least $9,430,000, in addition to an amount to be determined

3

at trial.

4

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

5

(California Penal Code § 502)

6
7
8

53.

Facebook and Instagram incorporate all other paragraphs as if fully set

forth herein.
54.

Defendants knowingly accessed and without permission otherwise used

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Facebook and Instagram’s data, computers, computer system, and computer network in

10
550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

9

order to (A) devise or execute any scheme or artifice to defraud and deceive, and (B) to

11

wrongfully control or obtain money, property, or data, in violation of California Penal

12

Code § 502(c)(1).

13

55.

Defendants knowingly and without permission used or caused to be used

14

Facebook and Instagram’s computer services in violation of California Penal Code

15

§ 502(c)(3).

16

56.

By artificially inflating certain Instagram users’ likes and impairing the

17

intended operation of Instagram, Defendants knowingly and without permission

18

disrupted or caused the disruption of computer services of Facebook and Instagram’s

19

computers, computer systems, and/or computer networks in violation of California

20

Penal Code § 502(c)(5).

21

57.

Defendants knowingly and without permission accessed and caused to be

22

accessed Facebook and Instagram’s computers, computer systems, and/or computer

23

networks in violation of California Penal Code § 502(c)(7). Defendants accessed

24

Facebook and Instagram’s computer network after Facebook and Instagram disabled

25

their Instagram accounts, and sent cease and desist letters to the Defendants revoking

26

their access.

27
28

58.

Because Facebook and Instagram suffered damages and a loss as a result

of Defendants’ actions and continues to suffer damages as result of Defendant’s actions,
11
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 13 of 18

1

Facebook and Instagram are entitled to compensatory damages, in the amount of at least

2

$9,430,000, attorney fees, and any other amount of damages proven at trial, and

3

injunctive relief under California Penal Code § 502(e)(1) and (2).

4

59.

Because Defendants willfully violated California Penal Code § 502, and

5

there is clear and convincing evidence that Defendants committed “fraud” as defined

6

by section 3294 of the Civil Code, Facebook and Instagram are entitled to punitive and

7

exemplary damages under California Penal Code § 502(e)(4).

8

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

9

(Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030)

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11
12

60.

Facebook and Instagram incorporate all other paragraphs as if fully set

forth herein.
61.

Defendants’ access and use of Facebook and Instagram’s computers and

13

computer systems was unauthorized because Defendants accessed Facebook and

14

Instagram’s computer network after Facebook and Instagram disabled their Instagram

15

accounts and sent cease and desist letters to Defendants revoking their access.

16
17
18

62.

Facebook and Instagram computers and servers are protected computers as

defined by 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2).
63.

Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(4) because they knowingly and

19

with intent to defraud accessed Facebook and Instagram-protected computers by

20

sending unauthorized commands to Facebook and Instagram computers. Defendants

21

sent the commands to Facebook and Instagram computers to manipulate Instagram’s

22

service by fraudulently inflating likes of certain Instagram accounts. Defendants did

23

these acts in exchange for profit.

24

64.

Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5)(A) because they knowingly

25

and intentionally caused the transmission of a program, information, code, or command,

26

and, as a result of such conduct, intentionally damaged Facebook and Instagram-

27

protected computers.

28
12
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 14 of 18

1

65.

Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5)(B) by intentionally accessing

2

a protected computer without authorization, and, as a result of such conduct, recklessly

3

causing damage to Facebook and Instagram-protected computers.

4

66.

Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5)(C) by intentionally accessing

5

a protected computer without authorization, and, as a result of such conduct, causing

6

damage to Facebook and Instagram-protected computers and a loss.

7
8
9

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
11

67.

Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. § 1030(b) by conspiring or attempting to

commit the violation alleged in the preceding paragraph.
68.

Defendants’ conduct has caused a loss to Facebook and Instagram during

a one-year period in excess of $5,000.
69.

Defendants’ actions caused Facebook and Instagram to incur losses and

12

other economic damages, including, among other things, the expenditure of resources

13

to investigate and respond to Defendants’ fraudulent scheme. Facebook and Instagram

14

are entitled to be compensated for losses and damages in the amount of at least

15

$9,430,000, and any other amount proven at trial.

16

70.

Facebook and Instagram have no adequate remedy at law that would

17

prevent Defendants from continuing their unlawful scheme. Permanent injunctive relief

18

is therefore warranted.

19

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

20

(Unjust Enrichment)

21
22
23
24
25

71.

Facebook and Instagram incorporate all other paragraphs as if fully set

forth herein.
72.

Defendants’ acts as alleged herein constitute unjust enrichment of the

Defendants at Facebook and Instagram’s expense.
73.

Defendants accessed and used, without authorization or permission,

26

Facebook and Instagram’s service, platform, and computer network, all of which belong

27

to Facebook and Instagram.

28
13
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 15 of 18

1

74.

Defendants used Facebook and Instagram’s service, platform, and

2

computer network to, among other things, defraud and deceive Instagram users,

3

artificially inflate certain Instagram users’ likes, impair the intended operation of

4

Instagram, interfere with Instagram’s service, platform, and computer network, and

5

wrongfully obtain money from the operation of their unlawful business.

6
7
8
9

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

75.

Defendants received a benefit by profiting off of their unauthorized use of

Facebook and Instagram’s service, platform, and computer network.
76.

Defendants’ retention of the profits derived from their unauthorized use of

Facebook and Instagram’s service, platform, and computer network would be unjust.
77.

Defendants’ unauthorized use of Facebook and Instagram’s service,

11

platform, and computer network has injured Facebook and Instagram’s reputation,

12

public-trust, and goodwill.

13

78.

Defendants’ unauthorized use of Facebook and Instagram’s service,

14

platform, and computer network has damaged Facebook and Instagram, including but

15

not limited to the time and money spent investigating and mitigating Defendants’

16

unlawful conduct.

17

79.

Facebook and Instagram seek injunctive relief and damages in an amount

18

to be proven at trial, as well as disgorgement of Defendants’ ill-gotten profits in the

19

amount of approximately $9,430,000.

20

80.

As a direct result of Defendants’ unlawful actions, Facebook and

21

Instagram have suffered and continue to suffer irreparable harm for which there is no

22

adequate remedy at law, and which will continue unless Defendants’ actions are

23

enjoined.

24
25
26
27
28

REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Facebook and Instagram request judgment against
Defendants as follows:
1.

That the Court enter judgment against Defendants that Defendants have:
a. Violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, in violation of
14
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 16 of 18

1

18 U.S.C. 1030;

2

b. Violated the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and

3

Fraud Act, in violation of California Penal Code § 502;

4

c. Breached Defendants’ contracts with Facebook and Instagram in

5

violation of California law;

6

d. Been unjustly enriched at the expense of Facebook and Instagram in

7
8

violation of California law.
2.

That the Court enter a permanent injunction enjoining and restraining

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

Defendants and their agents, servants, employees, successors, and assigns, and all other

10
550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

9

persons acting in concert with or conspiracy with any of them or who are affiliated with

11

Defendants from:

12

a. Accessing or attempting to access Facebook and Instagram’s service,

13

platform, and computer systems;

14

b. Creating or maintaining any Instagram accounts in violation of

15

Instagram’s TOU;

16

c. Engaging in any activity that disrupts, diminishes the quality of,

17

interferes with the performance of, or impairs the functionality of

18

Facebook and Instagram’s service, platform, and computer systems; and

19

d. Engaging in any activity, or facilitating others to do the same, that

20

violates Instagram’s TOU, Community Guidelines, or other related

21

policy referenced herein.

22

3.

That Facebook and Instagram be awarded damages, including, but not

23

limited to, compensatory, statutory, and punitive damages, as permitted by law and in

24

such amounts to be proven at trial.

25

4.

That Defendants account for, hold in constructive trust, pay over to

26

Facebook and Instagram, and otherwise disgorge profits derived from Defendants’

27

unjust enrichment, which is estimated to be $9,430,000.

28
15
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 17 of 18

1
2
3
4

5.

That Facebook and Instagram be awarded its reasonable costs, including

reasonable attorneys’ fees.
6.

That Facebook and Instagram be awarded pre- and post-judgment interest

as allowed by law.

5

7.

6

just and proper.

That the Court grant all such other and further relief as the Court may deem

7
8

Dated: April 25, 2019

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

9

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10

By:

11
12
13

/s/ Ann Marie Mortimer
Ann Marie Mortimer
Jason J. Kim
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
FACEBOOK, INC. and
INSTAGRAM, LLC

14
Jessica Romero
Michael Chmelar
Stacy Chen
Platform Enforcement and
Litigation
Facebook, Inc.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16

COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262

Case 3:19-cv-02262 Document 1 Filed 04/25/19 Page 18 of 18

1
2

JURY TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury on all issues triable to a jury.

3
4

Dated: April 25, 2019

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

5
6

By:

7
8
9

/s/ Ann Marie Mortimer
Ann Marie Mortimer
Jason J. Kim
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
FACEBOOK, INC. and
INSTAGRAM, LLC

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

550 South Hope Street, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90071-2627

10
Jessica Romero
Michael Chmelar
Stacy Chen
Platform Enforcement and
Litigation
Facebook, Inc.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
099900.12852 EMF_US 73690998v1

17
COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
3:19-cv-02262