NSO Group Seeks New Trial Over $167M Damages

NSO Group Seeks New Trial Over $167M Damages

NSO Group is seeking a new trial after a U.S. federal jury ordered it to pay $167.25 million in damages to Meta‘s WhatsApp. The Israeli spyware firm argues that the punitive damages are “outrageous” and “unconstitutionally excessive,” claiming they far exceed the $444,719 in compensatory damages awarded. NSO contends that the jury’s decision reflects an improper desire to bankrupt the company, rather than a fair assessment of damages .Bloomberg Law News

The case centers on NSO‘s Pegasus spyware, which exploited a WhatsApp vulnerability in 2019 to target over 1,400 users, including journalists and human rights activists. Meta hailed the verdict as a significant win for digital privacy and security, marking the first successful legal action against a spyware developer for unlawful surveillance practices .Financial Times

NSO maintains that it sells its technology exclusively to legitimate governments for public safety purposes. However, evidence presented during the trial indicated that the company continued to modify its hacking techniques even after WhatsApp filed the lawsuit, suggesting willful misconduct .Financial Times

Meta plans to donate any recovered damages to digital rights organizations and is pursuing a permanent injunction to prevent NSO from targeting WhatsApp users in the future .Bitdefender

Background of the Case

The legal battle stems from allegations concerning NSO Group’s Pegasus software and its use in targeting journalists, activists, and politicians. Critics argue that the technology enables governments to spy on individuals, infringing on their privacy and human rights. The plaintiffs in the case successfully argued that NSO Group should be held liable for the damages caused by the alleged misuse of its software.

NSO Group contends that the awarded damages are disproportionate and that the court should reconsider the verdict. They assert that their technology is intended for legitimate law enforcement purposes, such as combating terrorism and crime, and that they are not responsible for any misuse by their clients.

Implications of a New Trial

If the judge grants NSO Group a new trial, the Israeli spyware firm would have another chance to contest the $167 million damages awarded to WhatsApp. This development could potentially reduce the financial penalties NSO faces. However, it would also extend the legal proceedings and keep the company’s controversial surveillance practices in the public eye.

Background of the Case

In May 2025, a U.S. federal jury found NSO Group liable for deploying its Pegasus spyware to hack approximately 1,400 WhatsApp users in 2019. The jury awarded $444,719 in compensatory damages and $167.25 million in punitive damages to Meta, WhatsApp‘s parent company . This marked the first successful legal action against a spyware developer for unlawful surveillance practices.The Verge

NSO Group’s Appeal

NSO Group has filed a motion requesting a new trial or a reduction in the punitive damages, arguing that the $167 million award is “outrageous” and “unconstitutionally excessive.” The company contends that punitive damages should not exceed four times the compensatory damages, which would amount to approximately $1.77 million in this case .The Record from Recorded Future

Implications of a New Trial

Granting a new trial would allow NSO Group to present its defense anew, potentially leading to a reduced damages award. However, it would also prolong the legal battle and maintain public scrutiny of NSO‘s surveillance activities. The case has already drawn significant attention to the misuse of spyware against journalists, activists, and other members of civil society .The Record from Recorded Future

Conclusion

While a new trial could offer NSO Group an opportunity to mitigate financial damages, it would also extend the duration of legal proceedings and continue to spotlight the company’s contentious role in global surveillance practices.

The Broader Debate on Surveillance Technology

This case is part of a larger global debate about the ethics and legality of surveillance technology. Many organizations and individuals are concerned about the potential for abuse and the need for greater regulation and oversight. As technology advances, it’s increasingly important to balance security needs with the protection of individual rights and freedoms.