it's not an unreasonable stretch to say this should also include call metadata
Yes. It is an unreasonable stretch. Cal. Penal Code § 632 prohibits "eavesdrop[ping] upon or record[ing] [a] confidential communication." There is no set of circumstances in the history of telecommunications where seeing your itemized phone bill is the same as eavesdropping.
I understand you feel violated. You should. What Facebook did is vile. But that's not a reason to throw due process out the window.
Recording that a confidential communication happened appears to read on to that law, that's still part of "recording a communication".
If a law said i couldn't "record your visit to a shop" and I shared commercially that you "went to the shop at X time and stayed Y minutes" even if I didn't record the details of your purchases, or what you were wearing, or whatever, it would still appear to be a contravention of the letter of that law.
Yes. It is an unreasonable stretch. Cal. Penal Code § 632 prohibits "eavesdrop[ping] upon or record[ing] [a] confidential communication." There is no set of circumstances in the history of telecommunications where seeing your itemized phone bill is the same as eavesdropping.
I understand you feel violated. You should. What Facebook did is vile. But that's not a reason to throw due process out the window.