Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against Snap using an account that was created when the user was 13 years old.

      Pennsylvania has filed a lawsuit against Snap regarding Snapchat. The case is based on a 13-year-old account that an investigator from the attorney general’s office created on a new iPhone prior to the lawsuit. The potential evidence from this account is crucial.

      Attorney General David Sunday submitted the complaint on August 25 in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, which includes three counts under the state’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Miranda Nazzaro reported the filing for The Hill, and the complaint is publicly accessible. Snap claims that the allegations misrepresent its platform.

      The first count concerns age rating. When Snap lists Snapchat in Apple’s App Store, it responds to a series of questions provided by Apple. These responses result in a 13+ rating, an increase from the previous 12+. They also produce a description indicating that the app features only infrequent profanity and crude humor, sexual content or nudity, references to drugs and alcohol, and mature themes.

      This same procedure assigns Snapchat a “T for Teen” rating in Google Play and Microsoft stores. Pennsylvania contends that all of this is misleading. The complaint details what the investigator discovered regarding Apple’s categories, including direct quotes. This includes videos of young men rolling cannabis and consuming spirits, as well as captions using opioid slang that depict users aged 15 and 14.

      For sexual content, the complaint mentions advertisements for a streaming app showcasing explicit clips, alongside creator videos. The language in the complaint is graphic, and four paragraphs are redacted. The publicly filed version is labeled Public Redacted, with paragraphs 56, 57, 61, and 68 left empty. These redactions are located within the content sections, with two following drug examples and two after sexual content, where specifics about what the company internally knew would typically be provided.

      The second count addresses Snapchat's design. Count two claims Snap did not disclose that Snapchat is addictive, while count three asserts that the design itself is unfair, regardless of internal disclosures. Named features include ephemeral content, infinite scroll, push notifications, autoplay, Snapscores, Snapstreaks, and Charms. The complaint argues that disappearing content encourages users to revisit the app to avoid missing anything, with push notifications often sent late at night.

      Snapstreaks track the consecutive days users exchange Snaps, with a streak ending after 24 hours of inactivity. Snap offers a fee to restore a lost streak. According to Sunday at a press conference, this streak feature assigns a tangible value to friendships and can impact children's self-worth.

      The Friend Solar System feature is highlighted as “perhaps Snapchat’s most extreme method of user manipulation.” This feature is part of a paid Snapchat+ subscription, where subscribers see a Best Friends badge indicating they are among the eight friends with whom they Snap and chat the most. Clicking on the badge reveals a planet representation in the friend’s solar system.

      The complaint lays out potential consequences, where a young user can compare their value to a friend. For example, a person designated as Mercury might rank someone else as Jupiter or Neptune.

      As for what Pennsylvania is seeking, each count requests the same relief: a declaration that Snap violated the law, temporary and permanent injunctions, and civil penalties for willful infringements. The state also seeks its costs, including expenses for expert witnesses and interest. No specific damages figure is mentioned, and the case was initiated by Jonathan Burns, the senior deputy attorney general overseeing the Technology and Privacy Protection Unit.

      The complaint asserts that Snap's North American revenue will exceed $5.3 billion in 2024, and its overall value surpasses $12 billion. Snap reportedly has millions of users across Pennsylvania, including tens of thousands under the age of 16. It also notes that Snap compensates some Pennsylvania users for the content they produce.

      Snap’s response emphasizes, “The allegations against Snap fundamentally misrepresent our platform and our approach to teen safety.” A spokesperson noted that Snapchat was designed with a different intent: to open to a camera rather than a content feed, promoting self-expression and genuine connections among friends. The company expressed disappointment in the attorney general’s choice to pursue litigation instead of collaborative efforts. Following the news, Snap's shares dropped by 6.75%.

      This lawsuit follows a similar case Sunday filed against TikTok earlier this month, utilizing the same statute and rationale. Additionally, Meta reached a settlement with 29 states for up to $16.68 billion while mid-trial, which entails daily usage limits and nighttime restrictions for teenagers, with a reserve of $5.3 billion pending the adoption of similar measures by TikTok and YouTube.

      In a related note, the Ninth Circuit allowed 2,400 similar lawsuits to advance this month without impacting Section 230.

      Regarding implications in Europe, where Snapchat has significant popularity among teenagers, this lawsuit does not extend to them since Pennsylvania's consumer law stops at state borders. Europe’s approach is primarily regulatory rather than litigious. The Digital Services