Meta / Linux Research - Living Tracking Document

Generated: 2026-03-12 03:15 UTC

Next scheduled update: 2026-03-19

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary
2. Entity Tracker
3. Bill Tracker
4. Lobbying Summary
5. FOIA Request Status
6. Key Findings (HIGH Confidence)
7. Timeline (Recent Events)
8. Source Index

Executive Summary

Project Status

Data Coverage

Phase Progress

Entity Tracker

Advocacy Group

Consortium

Consulting Firm

Corporation

Framework

Legislator

Lobbying Firm

Nonprofit

Organization

Pac

Person

Platform

Standards Body

Vendor

Bill Tracker

Lobbying Summary

Registered Lobbyists

FOIA Request Status

Key Findings (HIGH Confidence)

1. Task 4.6

Wayback Machine DCA website analysis (CDX API, 100+ snapshots, Dec 2024 - Mar 2026): NO version of the DCA website has EVER disclosed funding sources. No “supported by”, “funded by”, or sponsor logos section exists in any archived snapshot. The earliest snapshot (Dec 19, 2024, one day after domain registration) and all subsequent versions contain zero references to Meta, Facebook, or any tech company as a funder. Site evolution: Feb 2025 was a simple landing page with the App Store Accountability Act campaign. By Mar 2026, it expanded to include About Us, Our Team, Resources, Donate, state bill tracker, and ASAA bill page. Featured “Voices” include Heritage Foundation, NCOSE, Ethics and Public Policy Center, Institute for Family Studies - all conservative organizations. The complete absence of funding disclosure across ALL snapshots is consistent with deliberate donor anonymity under 501(c)(4) status, despite Meta funding being confirmed by Bloomberg and acknowledged by Stefanski under legislative questioning.

Sources: Wayback Machine CDX API, web.archive.org snapshots Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:15:48

2. Task 4.6

Digital Childhood Institute (DCI) EIN FOUND: 39-3684798. Very new 501(c)(3) - IRS ruling date November 2025. Registered in Wilmington, DE with operations in Utah. Founded by Melissa McKay. No 990 filings exist yet. DCI EXPLICITLY states it does not accept tech platform funding - this contrasts with DCA (501(c)(4)) which confirmed accepting tech funding under questioning.

Sources: ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, IRS TEOS Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:05:14

3. Task 4.9

ConnectSafely conflicts of interest: CEO Larry Magid serves on Meta’s Safety Advisory Council and receives honorarium. Revenue is 89.7% contributions with $0 program service revenue. Executive compensation ($387K) consumes 57.5% of expenses ($673K). Magid earned $218,708 in 2024. Funded by Meta since at least 2017, also by Google, Microsoft, Snapchat. Magid has publicly OPPOSED certain child safety bills - effectively acting as a tech-industry voice while running a nominally independent child safety organization.

Sources: ConnectSafely 990 filings, ProPublica Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:05:14

4. Task 4.3

California lobbying data: Meta spent $1,036,728 on CA state lobbying in Q1-Q3 2025 (record pace). Q2 2025 alone: $518,605 (highest single quarter ever). Paid CA Chamber of Commerce $3.1M. CRITICAL: Meta SUPPORTED AB-1043 publicly while its trade associations (TechNet, Chamber of Progress) OPPOSED it - Meta broke ranks to support a bill that burdens OS providers and app stores (Apple/Google) rather than platforms (Meta). This confirms the strategic interest hypothesis.

Sources: CalAccess, news reporting Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:05:14

5. Task 4.7

LA Senate hearing testimony details: Sen. Jay Morris pressed Casey Stefanski (DCA ED) on funding. Stefanski said she was “not comfortable” answering, eventually confirmed tech companies fund DCA but refused to name them. She identified the “father of DCA’s founder” as largest donor. DCA paid attorneys to draft model legislation. Meta’s Nicole Lopez testified IN SUPPORT of HB-570. Apple and Google filed opposition but sent NO representatives to testify. DCA confirmed meeting with Google for broader support.

Sources: LA Senate Commerce Committee hearing, The Center Square, Deseret News Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:05:14

6. Task 4.5

Arabella network scale: Sixteen Thirty Fund ($282M revenue, 318 grants totaling $236.5M in 2024), Windward Fund and Hopewell Fund combined 2023 revenue $370M. Including NVF, the Arabella network exceeds $1B annually. Adam Eichberg (Meta’s CO lobbyist) chairs NVF board. All Arabella entities share 1828 L St NW, DC. No direct Arabella→child safety grant connection found yet, but Schedule I data (823+ grant recipients across NVF alone) could not be fully parsed.

Sources: ProPublica, InfluenceWatch, Arabella network 990 filings Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:05:14

7. Task 4.4

Headwaters Strategies lobbying expenditure data (CO SODA API): Total Meta/Facebook payments to Headwaters: ~$338,500 (2019-2026). Combined Colorado lobbying income from Meta (Headwaters + in-house): ~$451,441. CRITICAL PATTERN: Monthly payments jumped from ~$5K/month (2019-2022) to $14-30K/month starting July 2023, coinciding with intensified state-level child safety legislation. Individual lobbyist incomes at current rates: Eichberg $15K/month (~$180K/year), Schmidt $8,333/month (~$100K/year), Burkhart $6,667/month (~$80K/year).

Sources: CO SODA API datasets dxfk-9ifj and df5p-p6jt Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:02:26

8. Task 4.2

LA HB-570 CORRECTED: The correct bill is “The App Store Accountability Act” (Act No. 481 of 2025), authored by Rep. Kim Carver (R-Bossier City). Signed by Governor Jeff Landry on June 30, 2025, effective July 1, 2026. Passed unanimously at every stage: House 99-0, Senate 39-0, both conference committee votes 98-0/38-0. Uses 4 age categories (child <13, younger teen 13-15, older teen 16-17, adult 18+). NOTE: LA uses different age brackets than CA/CO (13-15 instead of 13-16, 16-17 instead of 16-18). This is a third template bill in the same family, with Louisiana-specific variations.

Sources: legis.la.gov, Act No. 481 of 2025 Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:02:26

9. Task 4.5

NVF 990 analysis: NVF (EIN 20-5806345) had $669M revenue, $593M in grants (2023). $103.4M specifically for youth development/education, with $59.2M in direct grants. NVF also spent $36.7M on lobbying including $31.2M in grants to OTHER orgs for lobbying. 823 domestic grant recipients on Schedule I. Could not parse full Schedule I (needs XML download). No direct NVF→DCA link found, but NVF grants to 501(c)(4) orgs would be unusual (NVF is 501(c)(3)). The $31.2M in lobbying grants to other organizations is a potential channel for indirect funding.

Sources: ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, NVF 2023 Form 990 Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:02:26

10. Task 4.6

DCA/DCI DNS/WHOIS deep dive: SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE CONFIRMED:

1. Same registrar (GoDaddy) with privacy protection on both domains
2. Same CDN (Cloudflare) on both
3. Same email provider (Microsoft 365) on both
4. CRITICAL: Same email marketing platform (Elastic Email) on both - indicates shared mass communications capability and likely same person/team set up both
5. DCA has 4-year registration (through 2028, well-funded) vs DCI 1-year (expires June 2026)
6. DCA registered Dec 18, 2024 - 6 months BEFORE DCI (June 13, 2025). This is reversed from normal pattern: typically the 501(c)(3) educational arm is established first, then the lobbying arm. DCA (lobbying) coming first suggests it was the primary objective.
7. DCA has sophisticated email stack: Microsoft 365 + Google + Amazon SES + Elastic Email, indicating professional-grade infrastructure for a 3-month-old organization.

Sources: WHOIS registries, DNS records (dig MX/TXT/A/NS) Recorded: 2026-03-12 03:00:40

11. Task 4.2

CO SB26-051 full text analysis - template bill comparison with CA AB-1043: IDENTICAL STRUCTURE: Both bills define the same terms in the same order: Account Holder, Age-Bracket Data, Age Signal, Application, Covered Application Store, Developer, Device, Operating System Provider, User. Both use the same four age brackets (under 13, 13-16, 16-18, 18+). Both impose the same penalties ($2,500 negligent / $7,500 intentional per minor). Both exempt only broadband ISPs, telecom services, and physical products. KEY DIFFERENCES: (1) CO effective date is Jan 1, 2028 (CA is Jan 1, 2027). (2) CO adds §6-30-105(6) exempting developers whose apps exclusively serve internal business communication, enterprise software sales, or technical support platforms. (3) CO uses “DEVICE” (§6-30-101(7)) defined as “ANY GENERAL-PURPOSE COMPUTING DEVICE” vs CA’s “computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.” LINUX IMPACT: Both bills define “Operating System Provider” as any person that “develops, licenses, or controls” OS software on any device. Neither bill contains any FOSS/open-source exemption. “Covered Application Store” is defined broadly enough to include apt, dnf, flatpak, snap repositories. Both bills would require Linux distros to implement: (a) an account system collecting user birth dates, (b) a real-time age bracket API, (c) integration with application package managers. TEMPLATE BILL CONFIRMATION: The structural and substantive similarity confirms these are template bills. Both mirror the ICMEC “Digital Age Assurance Act” model legislation.

Sources: CO SB26-051 introduced text (PDF), CA AB-1043 Chapter 675 Recorded: 2026-03-12 02:24:10

12. Task 4.5

ATEP strategic alignment with age verification advocacy: ATEP’s three stated pillars include “putting parents in charge of how their kids experience online apps and AI technologies” - this directly aligns with the age attestation legislative agenda (AB-1043, SB26-051). ATEP is NOT registered as a federal FEC committee; it appears to operate as a state-level Super PAC filing with individual state agencies. Of its $45M war chest, only $329K was spent by year-end 2025 - the vast majority is still undeployed. Additionally, Meta spent $518K lobbying Sacramento specifically on child protection legislation, separate from PAC spending. The combination of: (a) $45M ATEP for electing tech-friendly state legislators, (b) $518K direct CA lobbying, (c) DCA advocacy for age attestation bills, and (d) Headwaters Strategies lobbying in CO suggests a multi-channel influence strategy where direct lobbying, PAC spending, and ostensibly-independent advocacy organizations are deployed in parallel.

Sources: TechCrunch, Politico, Axios, CRBC News, FEC.gov Recorded: 2026-03-12 01:43:31

13. Task 4.2

CO SB26-051 legislative details:

• Prime sponsors: Sen. Matt Ball, Sen. Larry Liston, Rep. Amy Paschal, Rep. Naquetta Ricks
• Co-sponsor: Sen. Nick Hinrichsen
• Introduced: 01/27/2026
• Committee hearing: 02/24/2026 (Senate Business, Labor & Technology)
• Amendment L.001 adopted in committee 02/24/2026
• Senate Third Reading: 03/03/2026, passed 28-7
• Status: Under consideration (awaiting House)
• Title: “Age Attestation on Computing Devices”
• Key provisions mirror CA AB-1043: OS providers must implement age bracket signal API, developers must request signals, penalties $2,500-$7,500 per affected minor.
• Effective date: August 12, 2026 if enacted without safety clause.

Sources: leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-051 Recorded: 2026-03-12 01:34:40

14. Task 4.5

ATEP/Meta PAC update: Meta launched TWO super PACs totaling $65M:

1. American Technology Excellence Project (ATEP): $45M from Meta (late Sept 2025)
   • Run by Republican veteran Brian Baker and Democratic firm Hilltop Public Solutions
   • Spent $329,000 in 2025 on polling, consulting, and legal
   • Focus: electing tech-friendly state politicians from both parties
2. META California (Mobilizing Economic Transformation Across California): $20M
   • Focus: California state-level candidates favoring lighter tech regulation Strategic goal: counter state AI regulation bills. The bipartisan structure (Baker + Hilltop) is designed to support candidates who oppose burdensome tech regulation in either party. Note: “American Excellence PAC” (FEC C00832501) is a DIFFERENT entity - a Leadership PAC with ~$500K, NOT the $45M ATEP.

Sources: Axios (09/23/2025), TechCrunch, Politico, FEC.gov Recorded: 2026-03-12 01:34:40

15. Task 4.4

Meta lobbying position pattern analysis (CO SOS data, 117 records, 22 bills): CRITICAL PATTERN: On child safety bills, Meta consistently takes an “Amending” position (actively seeking changes) on bills regulating SOCIAL MEDIA platforms: HB25-1287 (Social Media Tools for Minor Users), SB25-086 (Protections for Users of Social Media), HB24-1136 (Healthier Social Media Use by Youth), SB24-158 (Social Media Protect Juveniles). EXCEPTION: SB26-051 (Age Attestation on Computing Devices) is the ONLY child safety bill where Meta is “Monitoring” only - passive observation with 4 lobbyists deployed but no amendment efforts. This is consistent with tacit support: Meta benefits from the bill passing as-is because Horizon OS has 83.3% compliance while Linux has 13.9%. Meta actively fights bills regulating its OWN platforms but passively observes a bill that burdens its COMPETITORS. Of 22 bills lobbied, 9 are monitoring-only, 5 are amending-only, and 5 escalated from monitoring to amending. SB26-051 fits the monitoring-only pattern alongside non-controversial bills like sales tax refunds and graduation items.

Sources: CO SOS lobbying database, co_sos_meta_lobbying.csv Recorded: 2026-03-12 01:32:33

16. Task 4.2

AB-1043 full text analysis - key provisions impacting Linux/FOSS:

1. §1798.500(g): “Operating system provider” defined as “a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device” - this explicitly includes desktop/laptop computers, not just mobile.
2. §1798.501(a): Operating system providers MUST provide (a) accessible interface at account setup for birth date/age entry, (b) real-time API providing age bracket signals (under 13, 13-16, 16-18, 18+).
3. §1798.504(f): Exemptions only cover broadband ISPs, telecom services, physical products. NO exemption for open-source, community-developed, or volunteer-maintained operating systems.
4. §1798.503(a): Penalties up to ,500/child (negligent) or ,500/child (intentional), enforced by CA Attorney General.
5. §1798.505: Operative January 1, 2027 - 10 months from now.
6. The bill requires an ACCOUNT SYSTEM with age data - Linux distros have no equivalent. Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu install processes do not collect birth dates.
7. §1798.500(e): “Covered application store” includes any publicly available platform that distributes applications - potentially covers apt, dnf, flatpak, snap repositories.

Sources: CA AB-1043 full text (Chapter 675, approved Oct 13, 2025) Recorded: 2026-03-12 01:26:28

17. Task 4.4

Meta client name fragmentation analysis: 6 distinct client name variants across CO and LA lobbying records. Headwaters Strategies team (Burkhart, Coyne, Eichberg, Schmidt) registers under “Meta Platforms, Inc” (no period). In-house lobbyists (Diers, Martinez, Sachs) use “Meta Platforms, Inc.” (with period). Two lobbyists (Martinez, Sachs) maintain separate legacy “Facebook Inc.” registrations. LA lobbyists use “Meta Platforms, Inc.” except Borill (“Meta Platforms, INC.”) and Harbison (“Meta Platforms, Inc. (META)”). DCA lobbyist Koch is separately registered under “Digital Childhood Alliance, Inc.” - not under Meta.

Sources: CO SOS lobbying database, LA Ethics Commission Recorded: 2026-03-12 01:10:48

18. Task 4.6

Headwaters Strategies OSINT: The firm is owned by Will Coyne and Adam Eichberg, who are the same individuals listed as individual lobbyists (COYNE, WILLIAM C and EICHBERG, ADAM) in Meta CO lobbying records. Staff Alyson Schmidt and Amber Burkhart are also registered individually. The “4 lobbyists + 1 firm” pattern in the data is actually 4 people and their firm - not 5 separate entities.

Sources: https://headwatersstrategies.com/our-team/; https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Clients-in-Colorado/vp65-spyn Recorded: 2026-03-11T15:14:22Z

19. Task 4.6

Headwaters Strategies OSINT: Adam Eichberg (co-founder, Meta lobbyist) serves as Chair of the Board of the New Venture Fund, part of the Arabella Advisors dark money network. He was also a founding board member of the Windward Fund and is incoming board chair of Sunflower Services (which acquired Arabella Advisors in late 2025). This places Meta’s principal Colorado lobbyist at the center of one of the largest dark money pass-through infrastructures in US politics.

Sources: https://newventurefund.org/who-we-are/board-of-directors/adam-eichberg-chair-of-the-board/; https://www.influencewatch.org/person/adam-eichberg/ Recorded: 2026-03-11T15:14:22Z

20. Task 4.6

Headwaters Strategies OSINT: The Center for Secure and Modern Elections (CSME), a project of the New Venture Fund, is also a Headwaters Strategies lobbying client. This means Eichberg’s firm lobbies for an organization housed within a network he chairs - a notable governance overlap.

Sources: https://www.influencewatch.org/person/adam-eichberg/; https://headwatersstrategies.com/our-clients/ Recorded: 2026-03-11T15:14:22Z

21. Task 4.6

Headwaters Strategies OSINT: Meta has been a Headwaters client since December 2019 (pre-rebrand from Facebook). The relationship has been continuously active through FY 2025-2026. Other notable clients include Airbnb, Tesla, City of Boulder ($60K/yr), Everytown for Gun Safety, Environmental Defense Fund, and Charter Communications.

Sources: https://data.colorado.gov/Legislative/Professional-Lobbyist-Clients-in-Colorado/vp65-spyn; https://headwatersstrategies.com/our-clients/ Recorded: 2026-03-11T15:14:22Z

22. Task 4.6

Meta-DCA funding confirmed: Reporting from the Deseret News (Dec 2025) confirms Meta funds the Digital Childhood Alliance. Louisiana Senator Jay Morris pressed DCA Executive Director Casey Stefanski about DCA’s tech company funding sources during legislative testimony. This upgrades the DCA anomaly from open question to confirmed Meta-funded advocacy.

Sources: https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2025/12/07/child-safety-bill-backed-by-meta/; https://www.thecentersquare.com/louisiana/article_e97200f8-13d0-4b1f-90a9-e9a7093d329f.html Recorded: 2026-03-11T15:14:22Z

23. Task 4.7

EU open-source age verification frameworks (EUDIW, T-Scy) provide FOSS-compatible alternatives to US commercial vendors. Key advantages: open-source licensing, no per-check fees, privacy-by-design, interoperable standards. Licensing: EU=Open-source (EUPL, Apache 2.0); reference implementations freely available vs US=Proprietary SDKs; commercial licenses incompatible with GPL | Cost model: EU=No per-check fees; self-hostable infrastructure vs US=Per-check fees ($0.10-$2.00+); cloud-only SaaS | Privacy architecture: EU=Privacy-by-design; selective disclosure; user-controlled wallet vs US=Biometric data sent to vendor cloud; vendor retains data per ToS | Interoperability: EU=Standards-based (eIDAS 2.0, ISO 18013-5); cross-border interop mandated vs US=Vendor-specific APIs; no interoperability standard | FOSS compatibility: EU=Fully compatible; designed for open-source integration vs US=Incompatible; proprietary blobs, API keys, ToS restrictions | Governance: EU=EU regulatory framework; democratic oversight; public code mandate vs US=Private companies; no public accountability; vendor lock-in risk | Age verification method: EU=Verifiable credentials from trusted issuers; zero-knowledge proofs vs US=Facial estimation, document scanning, parent-verified (K-ID) | Offline capability: EU=Wallet-based verification works offline after credential issuance vs US=Requires internet for each check; no offline mode

Sources: https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet; https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/eudi-lib-jvm-siop-openid4vp-kt; https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/european-digital-identity-wallet-architecture-and-reference-framework; https://tscy.eu/; https://tscy.eu/age-verification/; https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/european-digital-identity_en; https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eidas-regulation Recorded: 2026-03-11T12:09:07Z

24. Task 4.7

Per-check age verification pricing is incompatible with FOSS: Per-check fee model - Commercial vendors charge per verification (typically $0.10-$2.00/check). FOSS distributions have no revenue stream to cover per-user fees, making integration economically impossible for volunteer-run projects.; API key requirement - Vendor SDKs require API keys tied to commercial accounts. Distributing API keys in open-source packages would expose them to abuse; not distributing them renders the integration non-functional.; Proprietary SDK licensing - Yoti, Jumio, and Veriff SDKs are proprietary and cannot be bundled in GPL-licensed distributions. Binary-only SDK blobs conflict with distro packaging policies (Debian DFSG, Fedora licensing guidelines).; Terms of service restrictions - Vendor ToS typically prohibit redistribution, reverse engineering, and modification - all activities fundamental to FOSS. Accepting vendor ToS may conflict with GPL obligations.; No offline/self-hosted option - Cloud-only verification requires internet connectivity and vendor uptime. Air-gapped or privacy-focused Linux installations cannot comply. Self-hosting is not offered or is prohibitively expensive.; Scale economics for non-commercial distros - A mid-size Linux distribution with ~1M users would face $100K-$2M/year in verification fees with no offsetting revenue. This exceeds the entire annual budget of many community distros.; Vendor lock-in and single points of failure - Legislation mandating specific commercial vendors creates single-vendor dependency. If Yoti or similar vendor exits the market, all compliant implementations break simultaneously.; Privacy and data sovereignty - Sending user biometric data to third-party commercial APIs conflicts with the privacy expectations of Linux users and the data-minimization principles of distributions like Tails or Whonix.

Sources: Analysis of vendor pricing models vs. FOSS distribution requirements Recorded: 2026-03-11T12:08:42Z

25. Task A2

NY S8102A: status changed from ’’ to ‘unknown’

Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:40Z

26. Task A2

IL SB-2037: status changed from ’’ to ‘unknown’

Sources: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=2037&GESSION=104&GA=104&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&LegID= Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:30Z

27. Task A2

IL HB-4140: status changed from ’’ to ‘unknown’

Sources: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=4140&GESSION=104&GA=104&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&LegID= Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:28Z

28. Task A2

IL HB-3304: status changed from ’’ to ‘unknown’

Sources: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3304&GESSION=104&GA=104&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&LegID= Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:26Z

29. Task A2

UT SB-142: status changed from ’enacted’ to ‘passed’

Sources: https://le.utah.gov/~2025/bills/static/SB0142.html Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:21Z

30. Task A2

US app-store-accountability-act: status changed from ’’ to ‘unknown’

Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:13Z

31. Task A2

US KOSA: status changed from ’’ to ‘unknown’

Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:53:13Z

32. Task 1.1

Meta kernel repo has 287 branches and 0 tags.

Sources: https://github.com/facebookincubator/oculus-linux-kernel Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:03:46Z

33. Task 1.1

Missing kernel source for firmware versions: Quest 3 v62, Quest 3 v63, Quest 3 v64, Quest 3 v65, Quest 3 v66, Quest 3 v67, Quest 3 v68, Quest 3 v69, Quest 3 v70, Quest 3 v71, Quest 3S v69, Quest 3S v70, Quest 3S v71. No matching branch or tag found in the repo.

Sources: https://github.com/facebookincubator/oculus-linux-kernel Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:03:46Z

34. Task 1.3

Meta’s oculus-linux-kernel repository (branch: oculus-quest-kernel-5.4) contains 0 tree entries. Found 0 notice/license file(s): none.

Sources: https://github.com/facebookincubator/oculus-linux-kernel Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:00:26Z

35. Task 1.3

No third-party GPL package notices found in the kernel repo’s notice/license files. The Linux kernel itself is GPL-2.0 licensed (COPYING file present), but no structured third-party NOTICE file enumerating bundled GPL components was found. This is typical for kernel repos (components are tracked via per-file SPDX headers) but means compliance verification requires per-file analysis.

Sources: https://github.com/facebookincubator/oculus-linux-kernel Recorded: 2026-03-11T11:00:26Z

36. Task 4.7

Hearing transcript keyword search configured for: Meta, Facebook, DCA, Digital Childhood Alliance, Stefanski, age verification, attestation. These keywords track Meta/Facebook involvement and DCA (Digital Childhood Alliance) connections to age-verification legislation in CO and LA.

Sources: hearing_scraper configuration Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:59:12Z

37. Task 1.6

AOSP Gerrit contributions from Meta (facebook.com) (facebook.com): 0 total, 0 merged, 0 open, 0 abandoned.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com (owner:domain:facebook.com) Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

38. Task 1.6

AOSP Gerrit contributions from Meta (meta.com) (meta.com): 0 total, 0 merged, 0 open, 0 abandoned.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com (owner:domain:meta.com) Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

39. Task 1.6

AOSP Gerrit contributions from Meta (oculus.com) (oculus.com): 0 total, 0 merged, 0 open, 0 abandoned.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com (owner:domain:oculus.com) Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

40. Task 1.6

AOSP Gerrit contributions from Samsung (samsung.com): 0 total, 0 merged, 0 open, 0 abandoned.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com (owner:domain:samsung.com) Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

41. Task 1.6

AOSP Gerrit contributions from Qualcomm (quicinc.com): 0 total, 0 merged, 0 open, 0 abandoned.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com (owner:domain:quicinc.com) Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

42. Task 1.6

AOSP Gerrit contributions from Google (google.com): 1 total, 0 merged, 0 open, 1 abandoned.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com (owner:domain:google.com) Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

43. Task 1.6

Meta’s combined AOSP contributions across facebook.com, meta.com, and oculus.com: 0 total, 0 merged. Full comparison report: /home/theseus/rsearch/meta-linux-research//images/aosp_contribution_comparison.md

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

44. Task 1.6

AOSP contribution comparison - Samsung: 0, Qualcomm: 0, Google: 1, Meta (combined): 0.

Sources: https://android-review.googlesource.com Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:55:54Z

45. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Sachs, Dan lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Facebook Inc. (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:15:01Z

46. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Facebook Inc. (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:15:01Z

47. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on HB21-1244 (subject: Restrictions On Collection And Use Of Biometric Info) on behalf of Facebook Inc. (position: Monitoring, period: 04/16/21 - 06/30/21)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:15:01Z

48. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on SB21-190 (subject: Protect Personal Data Privacy) on behalf of Facebook Inc. (position: Amending, period: 03/23/21 - 06/30/21)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:15:01Z

49. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Sachs, Dan lobbied on SB21-190 (subject: Protect Personal Data Privacy) on behalf of Facebook Inc. (position: Amending, period: 03/23/21 - 06/30/21)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:15:01Z

50. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

51. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

52. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

53. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

54. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Sachs, Dan lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

55. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

56. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB26-1058 (subject: Protections for Minors Featured in Digital Content) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/09/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

57. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB26-051 (subject: Age Attestation on Computing Devices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

58. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB26-1058 (subject: Protections for Minors Featured in Digital Content) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/09/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

59. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB26-051 (subject: Age Attestation on Computing Devices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

60. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB26-1058 (subject: Protections for Minors Featured in Digital Content) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/09/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

61. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB26-051 (subject: Age Attestation on Computing Devices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

62. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB26-1058 (subject: Protections for Minors Featured in Digital Content) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/09/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

63. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB26-051 (subject: Age Attestation on Computing Devices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/26 - Current)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

64. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Diers, Tyler lobbied on n/a (subject: n/a) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: n/a, period: n/a - n/a)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

65. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on RULES (subject: Privacy Rules) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Monitoring, period: 04/30/22 - 06/30/22)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

66. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB23-207 (subject: Sales And Use Tax Refund For Data Center Purchases) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 04/03/23 - 06/30/23)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

67. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB23-207 (subject: Sales And Use Tax Refund For Data Center Purchases) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 04/03/23 - 06/30/23)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

68. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB23-207 (subject: Sales And Use Tax Refund For Data Center Purchases) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 04/03/23 - 06/30/23)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

69. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB23-207 (subject: Sales And Use Tax Refund For Data Center Purchases) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 04/03/23 - 06/30/23)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

70. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB23-207 (subject: Sales And Use Tax Refund For Data Center Purchases) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 04/03/23 - 06/30/23)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

71. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/26/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

72. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/02/24 - 02/26/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

73. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/29/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

74. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/29/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

75. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 03/14/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

76. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 03/14/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

77. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/15/24 - 03/25/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

78. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/26/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

79. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/14/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

80. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/29/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

81. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB24-1468 (subject: Artificial Intelligence & Biometric Technologies) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/07/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

82. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB24-205 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

83. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB24-041 (subject: Privacy Protections for Children’s Online Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

84. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/25/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

85. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/26/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

86. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/14/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

87. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/29/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

88. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/26/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

89. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/26/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

90. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/26/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

91. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/29/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

92. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/29/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

93. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 03/14/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

94. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/02/24 - 03/14/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

95. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/15/24 - 03/25/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

96. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/15/24 - 03/25/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

97. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/15/24 - 03/25/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

98. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB24-1468 (subject: Artificial Intelligence & Biometric Technologies) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

99. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB24-205 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

100. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB24-041 (subject: Privacy Protections for Children’s Online Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

101. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/25/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

102. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/26/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

103. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1070 (subject: Allowing Certain Items at School Graduation) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

104. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/14/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

105. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/29/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

106. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB24-1468 (subject: Artificial Intelligence & Biometric Technologies) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

107. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB24-205 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

108. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB24-041 (subject: Privacy Protections for Children’s Online Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

109. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/25/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

110. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/26/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

111. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/14/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

112. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/29/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

113. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB24-1468 (subject: Artificial Intelligence & Biometric Technologies) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

114. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB24-205 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

115. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB24-041 (subject: Privacy Protections for Children’s Online Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

116. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/25/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

117. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

118. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 02/29/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

119. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 03/14/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

120. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/15/24 - 03/25/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

121. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

122. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

123. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on SB24-085 (subject: Sales & Use Tax Rebate for Digital Asset Purchases) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Monitoring, period: 02/12/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

124. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on SB24-205 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Amending, period: 04/19/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

125. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Martinez, Ana lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc. (position: Amending, period: 03/25/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

126. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1058 (subject: Protect Privacy of Biological Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/26/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

127. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1130 (subject: Privacy of Biometric Identifiers & Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/14/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

128. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1136 (subject: Healthier Social Media Use by Youth) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/29/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

129. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB24-1468 (subject: Artificial Intelligence & Biometric Technologies) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

130. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB24-205 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 05/06/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

131. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB24-041 (subject: Privacy Protections for Children’s Online Data) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 02/01/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

132. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB24-158 (subject: Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/25/24 - 06/30/24)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

133. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB25-1287 (subject: Social Media Tools for Minor Users & Parents) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/28/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

134. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB25-1090 (subject: Protections Against Deceptive Pricing Practices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/10/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

135. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB25-070 (subject: Online Marketplaces & Third-Party Sellers) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/17/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

136. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB25-086 (subject: Protections for Users of Social Media) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 01/30/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

137. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB25-1287 (subject: Social Media Tools for Minor Users & Parents) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/27/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

138. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB25-1090 (subject: Protections Against Deceptive Pricing Practices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/10/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

139. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB25-070 (subject: Online Marketplaces & Third-Party Sellers) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/17/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

140. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB25-086 (subject: Protections for Users of Social Media) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 01/30/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

141. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB25-1287 (subject: Social Media Tools for Minor Users & Parents) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/27/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

142. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB25-1090 (subject: Protections Against Deceptive Pricing Practices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/10/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

143. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB25-070 (subject: Online Marketplaces & Third-Party Sellers) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/17/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

144. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB25-086 (subject: Protections for Users of Social Media) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 01/30/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

145. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB25-1287 (subject: Social Media Tools for Minor Users & Parents) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/27/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

146. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on HB25-1090 (subject: Protections Against Deceptive Pricing Practices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/10/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

147. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB25-070 (subject: Online Marketplaces & Third-Party Sellers) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/17/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

148. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: EICHBERG, ADAM lobbied on SB25-086 (subject: Protections for Users of Social Media) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 01/30/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

149. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB25-1287 (subject: Social Media Tools for Minor Users & Parents) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 03/28/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

150. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB25-1090 (subject: Protections Against Deceptive Pricing Practices) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/10/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

151. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB25-070 (subject: Online Marketplaces & Third-Party Sellers) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 02/17/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

152. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB25-086 (subject: Protections for Users of Social Media) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Amending, period: 01/30/25 - 06/30/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

153. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on HB25-B1008 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence Interactions) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

154. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Headwaters Strategies lobbied on SB25-B004 (subject: Increase Transparency for Algorithmic Systems) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

155. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on HB25-B1008 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence Interactions) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

156. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Schmidt, Alyson lobbied on SB25-B004 (subject: Increase Transparency for Algorithmic Systems) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

157. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on HB25-B1008 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence Interactions) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

158. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: COYNE, WILLIAM C lobbied on SB25-B004 (subject: Increase Transparency for Algorithmic Systems) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

159. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on HB25-B1008 (subject: Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence Interactions) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

160. Task 4.1

Colorado lobbying: Burkhart, Amber Janelle lobbied on SB25-B004 (subject: Increase Transparency for Algorithmic Systems) on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc (position: Monitoring, period: 08/23/25 - 08/27/25)

Sources: https://www.sos.state.co.us/lobby/SearchPrincipal.do Recorded: 2026-03-11T10:14:58Z

161. Task 4.3

PAC tracker collected 8 records totaling $0.00 from sources: FEC, TRACER.

Sources: FEC, TRACER Recorded: 2026-03-11T09:08:03Z

162. Task 4.6

RDAP lookup for digitalchildhoodalliance.org: registrant=redacted, created=2024-12-18T04:11:13.629Z, nameservers=[’leia.ns.cloudflare.com’, ‘mitch.ns.cloudflare.com’]

Sources: https://rdap.org/domain/digitalchildhoodalliance.org Recorded: 2026-03-11T08:23:41Z

163. Task EU-US-COMPARE

EU age verification blueprint: The EU approach centres on the EUDIW (EU Digital Identity Wallet) under eIDAS 2.0, providing government-issued verifiable credentials with selective disclosure for age verification. Found 0 related GitHub repos. T-Scy consortium search returned 4 results. Key difference from US approach: wallet-based, user-controlled, interoperable across platforms and OS vendors.

Sources: GitHub API, EC EUDIW documentation Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:51:34Z

164. Task EU-US-COMPARE

EU vs US age verification comparison: EU uses platform-level regulation (DSA/VLOPs) with FOSS exemptions and privacy-by-design (EUDIW). US uses OS-level mandates (AB 1043, SB 26-051) with no FOSS exemption, concentrating power in Apple/Google. Key risk: US approach threatens open-source OS distributions and creates vendor lock-in absent from the EU model.

Sources: EUR-Lex (DSA), CA AB 1043, CO SB 26-051 Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:51:34Z

165. Task EU-US-COMPARE

FOSS exemption analysis: EU provides 5 distinct protection mechanisms for FOSS. US model creates 4 categories of threat affecting 13+ named projects/channels. 4 technical barriers exist with no current FOSS workaround. The EU EUDIW (open-source) provides a compliance pathway for FOSS; the US offers none.

Sources: DSA Recital 13, AB 1043 text, SB 26-051 text, EUDIW GitHub Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:51:34Z

166. Task EU-US-COMPARE

EU DSA age verification analysis: Age verification obligations under the DSA apply primarily to VLOPs (>= 45M monthly EU users) through Articles 34-35 risk assessment and mitigation requirements. Smaller platforms face graduated obligations. FOSS projects that do not act as intermediary services are outside DSA scope entirely (Recital 13). Micro/small enterprises receive additional exemptions from transparency and reporting requirements.

Sources: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2065 Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:51:22Z

167. Task 1.8

Patent US20210286628A1: “Operating System With A Single Kernel Stack Per Processor” Status: abandoned. Filed: 2021-05-04. Claims: 38. Horizon OS relevance: low (2 keyword matches).

Sources: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20210286628A1/en Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:47:32Z

168. Task 1.8

Patent US11119931B1: “Data pipeline for microkernel operating system” Status: expired. Filed: 2019-09-18. Claims: 85. Horizon OS relevance: medium (3 keyword matches).

Sources: https://patents.google.com/patent/US11119931B1/en Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:47:32Z

169. Task 3.4

Meta holds Platinum membership at the Linux Foundation at $500,000/yr. This grants Meta a guaranteed board seat, TSC voting rights, and marketing council seat. Platinum members have direct governance influence over LF project selection, funding, and strategic direction.

Sources: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/members, https://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/board-members Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:46:44Z

170. Task 3.4

Kathy Kam, Director of Open Source at Meta, serves as Meta’s Platinum member representative on the Linux Foundation Board of Directors. This gives Meta direct influence on LF governance including project selection, budget allocation, and policy decisions.

Sources: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/about/board-members, https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathykam/ Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:46:44Z

171. Task 3.4

Meta is involved in 8 LF-affiliated projects. Meta founded or created 4 of these: PyTorch Foundation, Open Compute Project (OCP), Presto Foundation, GraphQL Foundation. This pattern of donating company-created projects to LF while retaining governance influence extends Meta’s reach within the open-source ecosystem.

Sources: https://pytorch.org/foundation, https://www.opencompute.org/, https://prestodb.io/, https://graphql.org/foundation/ Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:46:44Z

172. Task 3.1

OpenXR extension audit: 265 total extensions found. Meta authored 76 (28.7% of total, 40.4% of vendor-specific). XR_FB_: 41, XR_META_: 35.

Sources: https://registry.khronos.org/OpenXR/specs/1.1/man/html/, https://api.github.com/repos/KhronosGroup/OpenXR-Docs/contents/specification/sources/chapters/extensions Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:44:04Z

173. Task 2.7

Licensing pattern identified: ‘Restrict-then-Open Cycle’. Meta repeatedly introduces restrictive licensing, faces community backlash, then relicenses to standard open-source terms. This was seen with React (BSD+Patents -> MIT) and may be playing out with Llama (custom license -> potential future change). Evidence: 5 events. Confidence: high.

Sources: Meta engineering blog, OSI, Apache Foundation, news reporting Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:40:30Z

174. Task 2.7

Licensing pattern identified: ‘Open-Source as Marketing Strategy’. Meta uses ‘open’ branding for releases that do not meet OSI’s Open Source Definition. This creates adoption through perceived openness while retaining commercial control. Llama 2/3 are marketed as ‘open’ despite having commercial use restrictions. Evidence: 4 events. Confidence: high.

Sources: Meta engineering blog, OSI, Apache Foundation, news reporting Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:40:30Z

175. Task 2.7

Documented 9 licensing events spanning 2014-10-28 to 2025-01-01. Identified 4 strategic patterns in Meta’s open-source licensing behaviour: Restrict-then-Open Cycle, Open-Source as Marketing Strategy, Licensing as Competitive Moat, Escalating Restrictions Over Time.

Sources: multiple public sources, see timeline Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:40:30Z

176. Task 2.4

Meta employees hold 0 of 0 BPF maintainer/reviewer positions (0.0%). BPF-related subsystem sections: 0.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:38:59Z

177. Task 2.4

Alexei Starovoitov: BPF co-maintainer and original author. Co-created eBPF (extended BPF) while at PLUMgrid, then joined Facebook/Meta. Serves as BPF subsystem co-maintainer alongside Daniel Borkmann. Controls the direction of BPF development.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:38:59Z

178. Task 2.4

Andrii Nakryiko: BPF libraries maintainer, libbpf author. Primary author and maintainer of libbpf, the canonical BPF user-space library. Designed BPF CO-RE (Compile Once, Run Everywhere) architecture. Key architect of BPF tooling ecosystem.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:38:59Z

179. Task 2.4

Martin KaFai Lau: BPF networking maintainer. Maintains BPF networking components. Contributed BPF socket storage, cgroup BPF, and other networking-specific BPF features used extensively in Meta’s infrastructure.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:38:59Z

180. Task 2.4

Song Liu: BPF contributor, live patching. Contributed BPF trampoline and live-patching support. Works on BPF performance features used in Meta’s fleet.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:38:59Z

181. Task 2.4

Yonghong Song: BPF compiler/BTF contributor. Key contributor to BTF (BPF Type Format) and BPF CO-RE compiler support in LLVM/Clang. Enables the ‘compile once’ paradigm that is central to Meta’s BPF deployment strategy.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:38:59Z

182. Task 2.1

Meta employees hold 0 maintainer and 0 reviewer positions across 0 kernel subsystems (kernel mainline HEAD). 0 unique individuals identified.

Sources: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/plain/MAINTAINERS Recorded: 2026-03-11T07:37:53Z

183. Task horizon-os-audit

Horizon OS has 5 built-in compliance features: Meta Account Age Verification; Get Age Category API; Family Center; Quest Store Age Ratings; Minor Account Defaults. These collectively address age verification, parental consent, content controls, parental tools, and default protections for minors.

Sources: https://developer.meta.com/horizon/documentation/native/native-age-api/, https://familycenter.meta.com/ Recorded: 2026-03-11T06:12:02Z

184. Task horizon-os-audit

Linux distros have 7 major compliance gaps: Account System Age Bracket; Age Category D-Bus API; Parent-Child Account Linking; Parental Consent Verification; Package Manager Age-Rating Enforcement; Unified Parental Controls Dashboard; Age-Gated Default Profiles. Estimated total implementation effort: 36-71 months of coordinated cross-project work.

Sources: Analysis based on freedesktop.org, GNOME, KDE project documentation Recorded: 2026-03-11T06:12:02Z

Timeline (Recent Events)

Source Index

Document generated: 2026-03-12 03:15 UTC

Next scheduled update: 2026-03-19