Zuckerberg set up fraudulent scheme to 'weaponise' data, court case alleges
In this particular article, <i>"weaponise"</i> doesn't mean private data as a weapon against the users (like Richard Stallman critiques of Facebook[1]).  Instead, the journalists and the lawsuit are talking about desirable user data as a <i>weapon against the API developers</i>.<p>The article has interwoven 2 themes in a disjointed way and I had to read it several times to separate the components of the dispute.<p>The 1st theme is that the company Six4Three wrote an app to find photos of friends in bikinis using Facebook's platform API.  Facebook later pulled the rug out from under them.  In this sense, this is similar to other stories about platforms changing the terms/accessiblity of API usage (e.g. Facebook demoting Zynga games, or Twitter closing off 3rd-party clients, etc).  If a platform entices programmers to use an API and then later restricts it (or kicks programmers off it), the claim is being made that it is <i>"fraud"</i>.  Facebook's counterclaim is that blocking programmers from using its API is exercising its editorial control and therefore <i>"free speech"</i>.<p>The 2nd theme that's mentioned in passing is the Six4Three bikini API dispute as a <i>forensic discovery</i> into how the Cambridge Analytica abuse was deliberately engineered into the platform  in 2011 and was approved by Facebook senior management.  I think this is the more interesting angle that the Guardian writers should have focused more text on.<p>[1] <a href="https://stallman.org/facebook.html" rel="nofollow">https://stallman.org/facebook.html</a>