The Algorithm of Addiction: In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction Litigation
A massive MDL is putting the 'Infinite Scroll' on trial. Meta and Google face claims that their platforms are 'defective products' designed to bypass the impulse control of minors.
In the Northern District of California (Case No. 4:22-md-03047), a massive Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is putting the "Infinite Scroll" on trial. While TikTok settled its portion of this specific bellwether trial in late January 2026, Meta (Instagram) and Google (YouTube) remain locked in a high-stakes legal battle over whether their platforms are "defective products."
The "Design vs. Content" Hook
The legal strategy here is a surgical strike against Section 230 immunity. Plaintiffs aren't suing over the content users post; they are suing over the design of the platform itself.
The "Defect" Allegation
Plaintiffs argue that features like "infinite scroll," "ephemeral stories," and "intermittent variable rewards" (the dopamine hit of a like) are engineered defects designed to bypass the impulse control of minors.
The Section 230 Shield
Meta's defense relies on the claim that they are mere intermediaries. They argue that "prioritizing engagement" is a form of editorial discretion protected by federal law, and that they cannot be held liable for how users interact with their service.
Why This Matters
If Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers allows a verdict against Meta, it creates a new category of "algorithmic negligence." It would treat software developers like car manufacturers—legally responsible for the "crashes" caused by their design choices.
Explore This Case
Use AskLexi to search the actual court documents from this case.