I think there's a tradeoff we make when using these services for free, that they are monetising it in certain ways. I think the value I get back from Google in

I think there's a tradeoff we make when using these services for free, that they are monetising it in certain ways. I think the value I get back from Google in Gmail, Docs, Youtube and a few other services is sufficient that I'm willing to accept a certain amount of monetisation on their part, though I use ad blockers. With facebook I think the value is lower so I barely use my Facebook account and stay logged out of it most of the time. I don't really see the merit of this case though. They're not alleging that facebook broke any data protection laws, for the purposes of this case, just that users 'aren't properly compensated'. I'm not sure how you'd determine that though, a lot of people use Facebook heavily, and presumably they value the service. Is it really up to a court to decide how much they value it? Users would get £50 each from this case, presumably for many years of use to this point on average, so this would be a few pence per week of their usage. If the lawyers bringing the case think that's all the user data is worth, that seems a small price to pay for most users of the service. It just doesn't add up.