内容来源：https://www.wired.com/story/meta-sued-over-training-data-for-its-ai-and-face-recognition-systems/

内容总结：

一对父母及其子女在芝加哥联邦法院对Meta提起诉讼，指控其未经同意利用Facebook和Instagram照片构建人脸识别系统NameTag并训练生成式AI模型。

原告方称，Meta违反了伊利诺伊州和加利福尼亚州的隐私法，在未通知或未获同意的情况下，从用户照片中提取生物特征信息。诉讼指出，Meta员工曾声称NameTag可通过用户的Meta关联或公开Instagram账号识别人脸，公司专利中也描述了将人脸与个人资料照片及其他Meta持有的图像进行比对的技术。

Meta发言人回应称该诉讼“毫无依据”，表示公司尚未将NameTag推向消费者，也未就相关功能作出最终决定，并强调“我们不会构建通用人脸数据库”。原告律师则表示，人们不应仅仅因为照片出现在社交平台上就担心生物特征信息被滥用。

此次诉讼还针对Meta的图像生成系统。Meta曾表示使用大量Facebook和Instagram图像及文本训练Emu模型，首席产品官称这些平台为其AI系统提供了“数据优势”。诉状指控训练过程非法采集了图像中人物的生物特征信息。今夏发布的Muse Image曾因允许用户基于他人公开Instagram账号生成图像而引发批评，Meta在数日内移除了该功能。

原告包括伊利诺伊州居民Francisco Alvarez及其儿子，以及加利福尼亚州居民Jeremy Wahl及其10岁女儿。拟议集体诉讼涵盖自2021年9月4日起图像被上传至Facebook或Instagram、或通过提示提交给Meta生成式AI系统的伊利诺伊州、加利福尼亚州及全美用户，诉状估计全国集体成员可能达数百万。

根据伊利诺伊州《生物特征信息隐私法》，原告寻求每项故意或鲁莽违规赔偿5000美元（以实际损失较高者为准），每项过失违规赔偿1000美元（以实际损失较高者为准），并请求禁令救济。加州方面的诉求则寻求额外赔偿及其他救济。

这并非Meta首次因生物特征数据处理面临罚款。2020年，公司同意支付6.5亿美元和解伊利诺伊州此前一起关于人脸识别系统的集体诉讼；2021年11月宣布关闭该系统并删除超过10亿份人脸印记；2024年，Meta同意向得克萨斯州支付14亿美元，以了结其非法收集用户生物特征数据的指控。

WIRED今年6月报道NameTag代码被秘密嵌入Meta眼镜AI伴侣应用后，Meta次日移除了该代码。公司辩称该功能从未存在，因为没有向消费者提供。但WIRED的分析及外部研究人员的测试发现，一个技术上可运行的人脸识别系统已随一款下载量达数千万次的应用发布。Meta首席技术官称WIRED的报道“极具误导性”且“完全不诚实”，但数周后又在播客中描述NameTag可识别眼镜佩戴者此前见过并要求设备记住的人，称“我认为这会是一个很棒的功能”。

诉状将本案描述为Meta长期侵犯隐私模式的一部分，并追溯到Facebook早期，引用2004年一段聊天记录，称CEO扎克伯格曾将信任他并交出数据的人称为“傻瓜”。

中文翻译：

上周，伊利诺伊州和加利福尼亚州的一对父母及其子女在芝加哥联邦法院提起诉讼，指控Meta非法使用他们的Facebook和Instagram照片来构建NameTag——一款为其智能眼镜开发的、尚未发布的面部识别系统——并用于训练包括Emu和Muse Image在内的生成式AI模型。

这起拟议的集体诉讼称，Meta在未通知或未征得同意的情况下，从人们的照片中提取生物特征信息，违反了伊利诺伊州和加利福尼亚州的隐私法。

《连线》杂志6月报道称，NameTag的代码已被秘密嵌入Meta眼镜的AI伴侣应用中，该应用下载量已超过5000万次。虽然该功能尚未向应用用户开放，但分析发现，该系统旨在将眼镜捕捉到的面部转化为生物特征签名，并与存储在用户手机数据库中的所谓“面部指纹”进行比对。该数据库被配置为可接收来自Meta的更新。当时，《连线》无法确定底层面部指纹数据来自何处。

诉状称，这些面部指纹可能来源于Facebook和Instagram上的图片，并援引相关报道指出，Meta员工声称NameTag可以通过用户的Meta社交关系或公开的Instagram账户来识别他人，此外还有一项公司专利描述了将面部与Meta持有的个人头像及其他图片进行匹配的技术。

Meta在6月告诉《连线》，该公司“没有在构建一个中央面部数据库”，但拒绝回答NameTag是否会采用选择加入机制，以及该系统将如何保留面部指纹等问题。诉状承认，Meta尚未披露是否使用了哪些图片来生成生物特征数据，称该信息仅由公司单方面掌握。

该诉讼还针对Meta的图像生成系统。Meta曾表示，其使用大量Facebook和Instagram图片及文本训练了Emu，首席产品官克里斯·考克斯称这些平台为其AI系统的“数据优势”。诉状指控该训练过程非法采集了出现在图片中的人的生物特征信息。今年夏天发布的Muse Image此前曾引发批评，因为它允许用户基于他人的公开Instagram账户生成图片，该公司在承认“偏离了目标”后数日内便移除了该功能。

“这起诉讼毫无依据，且歪曲了我们的工作。我们一直对如何使用人们的信息来构建和改进AI产品保持透明。至于NameTag，没有任何东西已向消费者发布，也没有就是否采取任何行动做出最终决定，”Meta发言人在一份声明中表示。“如果我们决定推出某项功能，我们将采取审慎的方式，并在完全透明的情况下进行。有一点我们可以明确——我们不是在构建一个通用面部数据库。”

“人们不应该仅仅因为自己的照片出现在社交媒体平台上，就担心自己的生物特征信息会被滥用，”Wexler Boley & Elgersma律师事务所合伙人、原告代理律师贾斯汀·博利在一份声明中表示。

原告包括弗朗西斯科·阿尔瓦雷斯及其儿子，两人均为伊利诺伊州居民；以及杰里米·瓦尔，加利福尼亚州居民，及其10岁的女儿。但拟议的集体诉讼涵盖伊利诺伊州、加利福尼亚州以及全美各地的人，这些人的图像曾被上传至Facebook或Instagram，或通过提示词提交给Meta的生成式AI系统，时间可追溯至2021年9月4日。诉状估计，全国范围内的集体诉讼成员可能多达数百万。

根据伊利诺伊州《生物特征信息隐私法》，原告寻求对每项故意或鲁莽违法行为赔偿5000美元（若实际损失更高则按实际损失计算），对每项过失违法行为赔偿1000美元（若实际损失更高则按实际损失计算），并请求禁令救济。加利福尼亚州的诉讼请求则寻求额外损害赔偿及其他救济。

这并非Meta首次因生物特征数据处理问题面临罚款。2020年，该公司同意支付6.5亿美元以和解一起针对其早期面部识别系统的伊利诺伊州集体诉讼。2021年11月，该公司宣布将关闭该系统并删除超过10亿份面部指纹。2024年，Meta同意向得克萨斯州支付14亿美元，以了结有关其非法采集用户生物特征数据的另行指控。

在《连线》6月4日关于NameTag的报道发布次日，Meta从应用中移除了该代码。该公司辩称该功能从未存在过，因为它未向消费者开放，尽管《连线》的分析和外部研究人员的测试发现，一个技术上可运行的面部识别系统已被内置在一款下载量达数千万次的应用中。

Meta首席技术官安德鲁·博斯沃思称《连线》的报道“极具误导性”且“完全不诚实”。数周后，博斯沃思在一档播客中描述了NameTag，称它可以识别眼镜佩戴者此前见过并已要求设备记住的人。“我认为[它]会是一个很棒的功能，”他说。Meta继续将NameTag描述为其正在探索的东西，而非可供消费者使用的产品。

诉状将此案定位为Meta长期以来一系列隐私侵犯行为的一部分。诉状追溯至Facebook最早的时期，援引了2004年的一段聊天记录，据称首席执行官马克·扎克伯格在聊天中将那些信任他并交出数据的人称为“蠢货”。

2026年9月11日下午3:09（美国东部时间）更新：添加了Meta的评论。

评论

返回顶部

英文来源：

A set of parents and their children in Illinois and California filed a lawsuit last week in federal court in Chicago alleging that Meta illegally used their Facebook and Instagram photos to build NameTag, an unreleased face-recognition system for its smart glasses, and to train generative AI models including Emu and Muse Image.
The proposed class action alleges that Meta violated Illinois and California privacy laws by extracting biometric information from people’s photos without notice or consent.
WIRED reported in June that code for NameTag had been secretly embedded in the Meta glasses AI companion app, which had been downloaded more than 50 million times. While the feature had not been enabled for users of the app, the analysis found that the system was designed to turn faces captured by the glasses into biometric signatures and compare them with so-called faceprints stored in a database on the user’s phone. That database was configured to receive updates from Meta. At the time, WIRED could not determine where the underlying faceprint data came from.
The complaint alleges that those faceprints are possibly derived from Facebook and Instagram images, citing reporting that Meta employees claimed that NameTag could recognize people through their Meta connections or public Instagram accounts, along with a company patent describing face matching against profile photos and other images held by Meta.
Meta told WIRED in June that it was “not building a central face database,” but it would not answer questions about whether NameTag would be opt-in or how the system would retain faceprints. The complaint acknowledges that Meta has not disclosed which images, if any, were used for generating biometric data, saying that information remains solely in the company’s possession.
The suit also targets Meta’s image-generation systems. Meta has said it trained Emu on large quantities of Facebook and Instagram images and text, with chief product officer Chris Cox calling those platforms a “data advantage” for its AI systems. The complaint alleges that the training process illegally harvested biometric information about people who appeared in the images. Muse Image, released this summer, had earlier drawn criticism after allowing users to generate images based on other people’s public Instagram accounts, a feature the company removed within days after saying it had “missed the mark.”
“This lawsuit is without merit and misrepresents our work. We've been transparent about how we use people's information to build and improve our AI products. As for NameTags, nothing has shipped to consumers and no final decision has been made on what to do here, if anything,” a Meta spokesperson says in a statement. “If we do decide to roll something out, we will take a thoughtful approach and do so with full transparency. One decision we can be clear about—we are not building a universal face database.”
“People shouldn’t have to worry if their biometric information will be misused simply because their photographs appear on a social media platform,” Justin Boley, a partner at Wexler Boley & Elgersma and an attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
The plaintiffs are Francisco Alvarez and his son, both Illinois residents, and Jeremy Wahl, a California resident, and his 10-year-old daughter. But the proposed class includes people in Illinois, California, and across the United States whose images were uploaded to Facebook or Instagram or were submitted to Meta’s generative AI systems through prompts, dating back to September 4, 2021. The complaint estimates that the national class could number in the millions.
Under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act, the plaintiffs are seeking $5,000 for each intentional or reckless violation, or actual damages if greater, and $1,000 for each negligent violation, or actual damages if greater, as well as injunctive relief. The California claims seek additional damages and other relief.
This is not the first time Meta has faced fines over its handling of biometric data. In 2020, the company agreed to pay $650 million to settle an Illinois class action over an earlier face-recognition system. In November 2021, the company announced that it would shut down the system and delete more than a billion faceprints. In 2024, Meta agreed to pay Texas $1.4 billion to resolve separate allegations that it had unlawfully collected biometric data from users.
The day after WIRED’s June 4 report about NameTag, Meta removed the code from its app. The company argued that the feature never existed because it was not available to consumers, even though WIRED’s analysis and testing by outside researchers found a technically functional face-recognition system shipped inside an app downloaded by tens of millions of people.
Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth called WIRED’s reporting “incredibly misleading” and “absolutely dishonest.” Weeks later, Bosworth described NameTag on a podcast, saying it could recognize people that a glasses wearer had previously met and had asked the device to remember. “I think [it] would be a great feature,” he said. Meta continued to describe NameTag as something it was exploring rather than a product available to consumers.
The complaint frames the case as part of a much longer pattern of privacy violations from Meta. Reaching back into Facebook’s earliest days, it cites a 2004 chat in which CEO Mark Zuckerberg reportedly referred to people who had trusted him with their data as “dumb fucks.”
Updated 9/11/2026 at 3:09 pm EDT: Added comment from Meta.
Comments
Back to top