> Usage of users' photos in ads should be opt-in to begin with. Prior to this "new normal" people were normally compensated for appearing in ads, according to a

> Usage of users' photos in ads should be opt-in to begin with. Prior to this "new normal" people were normally compensated for appearing in ads, according to a contract. This is not the case, nor is it normal. Facebook tested naming friends (not making anyone appear) in recommendations: there was no new information revealed (you can see your friend's Likes at all time on their page); Facebook tested displaying relevant information in different ways. They similarly name common friends when someone you don't know comments on a thread you have taken part of. Some of the content on Facebook is paid for: some by me, as an individual, to promote important information about myself; some by corporate entities. In one, unsuccessful, test Facebook tried to associate friends that where also fans with paid-for targeted recommendation. If you want to be compensated for your image appearing on Facebook ads, I know agencies that enroll model: I’d be happy to refer you. I'm sure they'll pay you as usual. > For other legal purposes it is not enough to say "but the 13-year-old said she was 18" so it is interesting that this is enough for Facebook. Facebook is very clear in their enrollment process that they need their users to be trustworthy in their statement; it has to do with the cost of the service. I have seen so much grief over Facebook actually checking your identity after an ID theft, that I can't imagine the amount butt-hurt over them checking the age of underage teenagers, from parents like OP, teenagers who lied and are most likely going to rationalise that out of the park, and more importantly you.