(INVASION OF COMMON LAW RIGHT OF PRIVACY – UNAUTHORIZED  MISAPPROPRIATION OF IMAGE)   (INVASION OF COMMON LAW RIGHT OF PRIVACY - PUBLICLY PLACING  PERSON IN FALSE LIGHT IN THE PUBLIC EYE)    (UNAUTHORIZED MISAPPROPRIATION AND COMMERCIAL USE OF NAME,  VOICE AND PHOTOGRAPHS – CIV. CODE § 3344)   10.  Users can also create or join interest groups and “Like” pages, many of which are  maintained by well-known products and companies as a means of advertising.    11.  The Facebook “Like Button” is a very popular feature of DEFENDANT’S website,  allowing users to express their appreciation of content such as other user’s Facebook status,  comments, and posted photos.    12.  Facebook users also have the ability to utilize their “Like Button” to endorse  various companies’ products, services and advertisements.    13.  A single click on a like button by a particular Facebook user will advertise to  thousands of others that a particular user backs or likes a particular company’s product or service;  a gigantic source of advertising.    14.  DEFENDANT will routinely post a sponsored company’s advertisement on a  user’s timeline, indicating to said user that one of his or her Facebook friends “Likes” that  particular company, giving the impression of endorsement.    15.  According to a recent Internet article, The Facebook “Like Button” is seen more  than 22 billion times per day and is embedded in over 7.5 million websites.    29.  PLAINTIFF brings this action on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others  similarly situated (“the Class”).  PLAINTIFF represents, and is a member of, the Class, consisting of:  All persons within the United States whose Facebook profile was manipulated  by DEFENDANT to give the impression to other Facebook users, including  but not limited to their friends, family and acquaintances, that said person  liked, endorsed and/or used a product/and or company that advertised on  Facebook without the consent of said person to use their likeness and/or  private data.     30.  DEFENDANT and its employees or agents are excluded from the Class.   PLAINTIFF does not know the number of members in the Class, but believes the Class members  number in millions, if not more.  Thus, this matter should be certified as a Class action to assist in  the expeditious litigation of this matter.   39.  PLAINTIFF re-alleges the foregoing paragraphs of this complaint and incorporates  the same by reference as though set forth at length herein.   40.  Continuing through the present, DEFENDANT knowingly used and is continuing  to use PLAINTIFF’S and other Class members’ name and Facebook photos for DEFENDANT’S  advantage, all without their prior consent.   41.  As a direct and proximate result of said acts by DEFENDANT, PLAINTIFF and  other Class members have suffered damages, in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred  fifty dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by them as a result of the unauthorized use, and  any profits from the unauthorized use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account  in computing the actual damages.   42.  The Facebook advertisements depicting PLAINTIFF’S likeness and the likeness of  other Class members were not authorized to be used in any fashion by DEFENDANT because  they were obtained without their consent; moreover, said advertisements were at no time to be  distributed to the public.   47.  PLAINTIFF re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 45 inclusive of this complaint, and  incorporate the same by reference as though set forth at length herein.   48.  By virtue of DEFENDANT’S wrongdoing and the facts alleged herein above,  DEFENDANT, separate and apart from, any statutory violation of California Civil Code § 3344,  committed an invasion of PLAINTIFF’S and other Class members’ right of privacy as recognized  by the common law of the State of California, and as supported and protected by the Constitution  of the State of California.   59.  PLAINTIFF re-alleges the foregoing paragraphs of this complaint and incorporates  the same by reference as though set forth at length herein.   60.  DEFENDANT, without PLAINTIFF’S consent and the consent of other Class  members, invaded PLAINTIFF’S and other Class members’ right of privacy by posting on  Facebook advertisements of companies, products and/or services which contained PLAINTIFF’S  and Class members’ misappropriated likenesses, purporting to promote said companies.    61.  PLAINTIFF and other Class members are portrayed in these advertisements  promoting said companies/products/services by “Liking” them with their Facebook profiles.  (See  Exhibit “A”).    62.  Such disclosure by DEFENDANT created publicity in the sense of a public  disclosure to a large number of people in that this was published on the Internet to thousands,  perhaps millions of other Facebook users.    69.  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   7.  Founded in 2004, DEFENDANT is the world’s largest social media networking  website with over a billion active users as of September of 2012.   77.  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   78.  DEFENDANT committed acts of false advertising as defined by California  Business & Professions Code § 17500 et seq. by disseminating statements that were untrue or  misleading in connection with advertising of sponsored pages, by creating the false impression  that its users liked or promoted the products, services and/or companies in said pages, and by  disseminating statements, including but not limited to its terms of use (including its Statement of  Rights and Responsibilities and Data Use Policy), that were intended to lead reasonable  consumers, including PLAINTIFF and Class members, to believe that Facebook was a medium  intended to convey truthful information and that DEFENDANT would not create information  about consumers or make false representations about them, in the manner alleged above.     79.  DEFENDANT knew or should have known through the exercise of reasonable care  that the statements were untrue and misleading and that PLAINTIFF and Class members would  rely on them to their detriment.     8.  Users must register to be able to use the website, after which they have the option  to create a personal profile, add other users as “Facebook Friends,” exchange messages and  receive automatic updates about their Facebook Friends when one of them updates his or her  profile.    83.  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   84.  This cause of action is brought for violations of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act  (“CLRA”).  PLAINTIFF brings his cause of action on his own behalf and on behalf of all  similarly situated consumers within the meaning of Civil Code § 1781.     9.  A user’s personal profile can consist of digital photographs, a wall for other users  to write on, a list of interests, an educational history, as well as other personal information.    91.  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   97.  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   98.  DEFENDANT entered into a contract with PLAINTIFF and Class members in part  expressed in DEFENDANT’S user agreement and other terms and conditions of use whereby  DEFENDANT agreed to provide its Facebook service to them in exchange for DEFENDANT’S  access to their personal information and Facebook content so that it could, among other things, sell  advertising space to marketers.    99.  As part of this bargain, DEFENDANT agreed, whether explicitly or impliedly, not  to interject false content and/or make false representations about PLAINTIFF and Class members  that would be visible to other Facebook users, specifically users’ Friends, as this would diminish,  reduce, and/or eliminate the value of the service to PLAINTIFF and Class members.    100.  DEFENDANT materially breached this contract with PLAINTIFF and Class  members by its conduct alleged herein, namely, by projecting false information to others,  including their Facebook Friends   101.  As a direct and proximate cause of DEFENDANT’s breach, PLAINTIFF and  members of the Class have incurred damages in that they did not receive the benefit of the bargain  for which they contracted and for which they paid valuable consideration in the form of their  Facebook membership and presence, personal information, and Facebook content.  Owing to  DEFENDANT’S breach, PLAINTIFF and Class members overpaid for the bargained-for service  and therefore are entitled to damages in an amount to be proven at trial.    BREACH OF CONTRACT   NEGLIGENCE   UNLAWFUL, UNFAIR, AND FRAUDULENT BUSINESS PRACTICES UNDER  CALIFORNIA BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE § 17200, et seq.   VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA FALSE ADVERTISING LAW   (CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE § 17500 ET SEQ.)   VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSUMER LEGAL REMEDIES ACT  CAL. CIV. CODE § 1750 ET SEQ.  