TikTok pays Alabama US$100m to avoid trial over teen safety

TikTok has reached a $100 million settlement with Alabama to avoid a trial over alleged child safety issues on its platform. The settlement, announced by Alabama's Attorney General Steve Marshall, requires the social media giant to pay the state a minimum of $100 million within 45 days, with the possibility of receiving up to $300 million if certain conditions are met.

The trial, originally set to begin next week, had been scheduled for Monday with jury selection. As part of the agreement, TikTok has committed to implementing stricter safety measures, including two-hour daily time limits and restricted access for children from midnight to 6am. These features, among others, are aimed at enhancing parental control and overall user safety.

This settlement is part of a growing trend of legal action against social media companies for alleged harm to young users. Earlier this year, TikTok settled similar cases in Los Angeles and Kentucky, while Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has faced more significant legal consequences, including a $375 million jury award in New Mexico and a $18 billion settlement in August.

For TikTok, the settlement avoids the potential public scrutiny that would have come with a trial, where company documents and executive testimony could have been revealed. The state of Alabama had previously sued TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance, alleging that the app was designed to addict young users, much like a "gambling machine."

The lawsuit focused on claims under Alabama's Deceptive Trade Practices Act, specifically questioning the effectiveness of TikTok's "Restricted Mode" and "Kids Mode" features. Alabama had set up TikTok accounts posing as underage users in the state, only to find that these accounts were quickly inundated with videos promoting suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, alcohol, and sex.

TikTok, whose US operations were recently transferred to a venture led by American investors, argued that the case should be halted due to Section 230 protections, which shield online platforms from liability for user-generated content.