Meta Class Action Alleges Your Facebook and Instagram Photos Trained Their AI. Are You Covered?

A new lawsuit says the family photos, vacation pictures, and selfies uploaded to Facebook and Instagram helped Meta build AI systems without the consent of the people pictured.

The proposed class action, filed in federal court in Illinois, accuses Meta of extracting biometric information from users’ photos to train its image generators and develop an unreleased face-recognition system for its smart glasses.^[1]

The proposed class could include millions of Americans. You may fall within the current definitions even if you never uploaded the photo yourself or created a Meta account.

However, the case is new. No class has been certified, no settlement has been reached, and there is no claim form to complete.

Thanks for subscribing!

Please check your email for your first message.

Never miss the privacy news that affects you.

Join thousands who get the latest security news, scams, and policy changes every week, right to their inbox.

Sign me up

By submitting this form you agree to receive emails from All About Cookies and to the privacy policy and terms.

What the lawsuit says

The plaintiffs are two parents and their children from Illinois and California. They allege Meta used photos from Facebook and Instagram to develop generative AI models, including Emu and Muse Image.

Meta has acknowledged using public content from its platforms to develop AI. Chief product officer Chris Cox previously described public Facebook and Instagram images as Meta’s “data advantage,” according to the complaint. Meta’s own generative AI privacy page says information used for AI development can include posts, photos, captions, and interactions with its AI features.

The lawsuit claims Meta’s AI models analyze people’s facial features and turn them into numerical representations. The plaintiffs argue these representations qualify as biometric identifiers or biometric information protected under Illinois and California law.

The complaint also connects the photos to NameTag, a face-recognition feature designed for Meta’s smart glasses.

WIRED discovered NameTag code inside the Meta AI companion app in June. Although consumers could not activate it, the software reportedly could convert faces captured by Meta glasses into "faceprints" and compare them with records stored on the wearer’s phone.

The underlying source of NameTag’s recognition database remains unclear. The lawsuit alleges the faceprints may have come from Facebook and Instagram images, citing statements from Meta employees and a company patent. The complaint also acknowledges that Meta has not disclosed which images, if any, supplied NameTag’s biometric data.

Meta removed the code from its app after WIRED published its findings.

Meta says the lawsuit misrepresents its work

Meta denies the allegations.

“This lawsuit is without merit and misrepresents our work,” a company spokesperson said.

The company said it has been transparent about using information to improve its AI products. Meta also said NameTag was never released to consumers, no decision has been made about launching it, and the company is “not building a universal face database.”

Meta has previously said its AI training uses public posts from adult users, excluding private content and material shared only with friends. That distinction could become important because the proposed class definitions are not currently limited to public photos.

Are you covered?

The lawsuit proposes three classes covering the period from September 4, 2021, through the present:

• A nationwide class for people in the United States whose image was uploaded to Facebook, Instagram, or one of Meta’s generative AI models
• An Illinois class with the same definition for people in Illinois
• A California class with the same definition for people in California

Uploading an image to a generative AI model during the “inference stage” means submitting it to an already-trained AI tool through a prompt.

The proposed definitions focus on the person shown in the image, not the person who uploaded it. You could potentially be included if a friend, relative, school, employer, or stranger posted a photo containing your face.

The definitions also include children. Two of the four named plaintiffs are minors whose parents filed on their behalf.

These classes remain proposals written by the plaintiffs’ lawyers. Meta can challenge them, and the judge may reject, narrow, or revise them before deciding whether the case can proceed as a class action. Appearing in a Facebook photo does not currently guarantee that you are covered or entitled to compensation.

How much money could class members receive?

No settlement fund or estimated individual payment has been announced.

The Illinois plaintiffs are suing under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act. They seek $1,000 for each alleged negligent violation and $5,000 for each alleged intentional or reckless violation, or actual damages if those amounts are greater.

Those figures are demands contained in the complaint. A court has not ruled that Meta violated the law or that every photo represents a separate payable violation.

The lawsuit also seeks damages under California privacy and publicity laws. The plaintiffs want the court to order Meta to stop the alleged practices and delete biometric information obtained from class members.

Meta has paid heavily in previous biometric cases. It agreed to a $650 million settlement over Facebook’s former photo-tagging system in 2020. In 2024, Meta reached a $1.4 billion settlement with Texas over separate allegations that it collected biometric data without authorization.

What you can do now

You do not need to register for this lawsuit or contact the court. If a class is eventually certified or a settlement is reached, eligible people should receive instructions through an official court-approved notice.

In the meantime, you can reduce the number of photos available for future collection by making your accounts private, changing old posts from public to friends-only, and reviewing photos in which you are tagged. Removing a tag does not delete the original image from another person’s account.

Before deleting relevant posts, consider downloading your Facebook or Instagram information and keeping records of the photo, upload date, URL, and original privacy setting. Avoid services demanding payment to “join” the case. No legitimate paid claims process currently exists.

Changing a photo’s privacy setting today also cannot guarantee that Meta will remove information already used to train an AI model. That lack of control sits at the heart of the lawsuit: once a face becomes training data, clicking “private” may have arrived years too late.

Take Control of Your Online Privacy

5.0

AllAboutCookies writers and editors score products based on a number of objective features as well as our expert editorial assessment. Our partners do not influence how we rate products.

Editorial Rating

Claim Deal

On Incogni's website

2026 Editors’ Choice

Best Overall Data Removal Service

Privacy Protection

Incogni

PROMOTION: Get 55% Off Annual Plans With Code COOKIE

• Top-rated data removal service that scrubs your info from 420+ data broker sites automatically
• Independently verified by Deloitte, meaning removals are actually sent, confirmed, and not just claimed
• The Unlimited plan extends coverage to 2,000+ additional sites with human-assisted custom removals

Author Details

Thomas Kent

About the Author

Thomas Kent is a multi-disciplined reporter with over a decade of experience covering online platforms, digital trends, and consumer-facing tech. Tom focuses on digital privacy, data tracking, and user behavior, with a particular interest in how cookies, online surveillance, and platform design shape the modern internet experience. His reporting takes a research-driven, news-focused approach, translating complex technical topics into clear, accessible insights.