The applicant himself argued in the application for approval and in response to the response to the request for approval that it would be possible to base the request for approval on the material obtained in the disclosure of the documents (see paragraphs 4, 60 and 85 for the response to the response to the request for approval).
In addition, in response to the response to the request for approval, it was argued in section 248 that: "The applicant opened a Facebook page about a decade ago that did not include his name at all. The page is called Ushio_bulb username and Facebook has no idea who the physical person behind this page is. And the fact that she knew how to link this to the applicant is unequivocal proof that she follows people and cross-references information and manages in this way to identify the user's identity even when he does not identify himself by name at all."
However, the situation is different from the time the applicant registered with Facebook at the time, and the information in our case that was provided in the disclosure of the documents is information about him as a Facebook user, and not as a non-user, as emerges from the testimony of the declarant on behalf of the respondent (see pp. 168-169 of the minutes of the hearing).
This testimony was not concealed, while no opinion was submitted on behalf of the applicant and no other evidence was brought that shows otherwise than the testimony of the declarant on behalf of the respondent.
The Applicant did claim in his summaries, in the chapter dealing with the collection of information about the Applicant (section 97 onwards) that Facebook confirmed that the Applicant did not provide his name when opening the account, "and therefore all the information that Facebook collected and maintained is information that it collected in its improper way of tracking 'non-users'" (paragraph 97 of the Applicant's summaries). However, the Applicant's summaries do not deal with the explanation given by the declarant on behalf of the Respondent in her testimony that the information provided was located only after the Applicant provided the details of the Facebook account that he had opened at the Respondent's request at the time and thus cross-referenced the information (see p. 166 ff. of the minutes of the hearing). As detailed above, the declarant explained how the matching to a Facebook account is carried out when material is transferred from third-party websites, using the "cookies" (see p. 168 of the minutes of the discussion).