He's a data engineer who alleges LinkedIn used his personal data without permission
of ConsumerAffairsThe "named plaintiff" in most consumer class action lawsuits is normally someone whose lawyer chose them as a sympathetic victim likely to appeal to a judge or jury's sensibilities. Their involvement normally ends with telling their story and signing an affidavit. But sometimes the plaintiff is an activist fighting for a cause they believe in.
Such is the case with the class action case filed recently against LinkedIn, accusing the popular business-oriented platform of using its members' private data to "train" its artificial intelligence engine.
The lead plaintiff in this case isAlessandro De La Torre, a Los Angeles data engineer who shared his thoughts in a recent blog post, which he shared with ConsumerAffairs. De La Torre writes:
Recent history is littered with examples of how AI has been abused to the detriment of individuals and society. Take the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where personal data from millions of Facebook users was harvested without consent and used to manipulate elections. Or the instances of facial recognition technology disproportionately misidentifying people of color, leading to wrongful arrests and discrimination. Even the explosion of generative AI tools like ChatGPT has raised ethical concerns, with reports of companies secretly feeding sensitive user data into these models without clear permissions.
LinkedIns actions fit squarely into this troubling pattern. Between 2021 and 2024, as a Premium subscriber, I used the platform to share private, sensitive communicationsbusiness strategies, job searches, and professional opportunities. Unbeknownst to me, LinkedIn disclosed these messages to third parties to train generative AI systems. This was not only a breach of contract but a fundamental violation of privacy. Worse still, LinkedIn quietly updated its privacy policy only after being caught, offering users an opt-out option that didnt undo the harm already done.
What makes this particularly concerning is the lasting impact of such disclosures. Once personal data is embedded into AI models, it cannot be fully extracted. This means sensitive communicationswhether about employment negotiations, intellectual property, or personal mattersmay forever inform AI outputs, potentially surfacing in other Microsoft products or even falling into the hands of third-party developers. Its a permanent violation, and LinkedIn has shown no intention of addressing this through meaningful action, such as retraining its AI models without user data.
This lawsuit is about more than just LinkedIn. Its about accountability in an industry that increasingly views privacy as an inconvenience rather than a right. If left unchecked, these practices will continue to proliferate, eroding public trust in technology and paving the way for even more egregious abuses. As we embrace AIs potential, we must also ensure its development is ethical and transparent, prioritizing user consent and equity.
My journey in data engineering and AI has shown me the transformative power of technology when wielded responsibly. From foundingScholarcash, a platform that helped thousands of students access scholarships, to guiding businesses and communities through my work atBuildifyandProject Ozone, Ive always believed in using technology to uplift and empower. However, my work has also shown me the darker side of the tech industrythe ways in which private data can be exploited for profit, often at the expense of those least equipped to fight back.
This case is a chance to draw a line in the sand. Its a call for greater transparency, stronger privacy protections, and a commitment to ethical AI practices. By holding LinkedIn accountable, I hope to set a precedent that will reverberate across the tech industry, ensuring that innovation is not built on the backs of exploited users.
Together, we can create a digital future where technology serves peoplenot the other way around.
Copyright (c) 2025 Alessandro De La Torre - Reprinted with permission
LinkedIn said the allegations are untrue."These are false claims with no merit, a LinkedIn spokesperson told ConsumerAffairs in an email.
Customers data is now permanently embedded in AI systems without their consent, exposing them to future unauthorized use of their personal information, the complaint alleges.
The suit seeks to represent Premium customers who sentor received InMail messages and whose data was disclosed to third parties before Sept. 18.
It seeks $1,000 for each of the millions of Premium customers as well as unspecified damages for breach of contract.
Photo Credit: Consumer Affairs News Department Images
Posted: 2025-01-24 18:24:34
