I’m not sure we even care about Facebook for its networking capabilities anymore–we only seem to care about its privacy settings. The social network is now facing a class-action lawsuit, filed in Canada, and has caved to certain requests from the U.K.’s Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), adding a “Panic button app.” But no matter what Facebook does, it never seems to be in the clear. Dealing with growth expectations, profit margins, consumer interests and privacy advocates is a weighing demand for Facebook, and it will have to fight through both sides of the privacy issues in order to prevail.

The Panic Button isn’t really the panic button CEOP had initially hoped for, but Facebook has created an opt-in feature for adding the app to your profile. It lets you report suspicious behavior for the purpose of having a safe experience online for you and your friends. I can almost guarantee that as a teen I would not have added a Panic Button-like feature to my Facebook profile, but that’s another story for another day.

The presence of the new “Panic Button” app may placate privacy and child-protection advocacy groups, and I’m all for that. But Sarah Perez over at ReadWriteWeb brings up the important point of its effectiveness versus reporting tools Facebook already has in place. Is Facebook better off handling reports in-house and working directly with officers, or do more standards need to be in place?

There’s the core problem of educating users no matter which way you look at it, with the bottom line coming down to what options and features should be implemented by default. Should a “Panic Button” be automatically included on your Facebook profile, or should you take the time to go through your profile settings? As if your Facebook experience weren’t overwhelming enough…thanks news feed.

On the other end of the privacy spectrum, the Merchant Law Group LLP filed a class-action lawsuit against Facebook in Queen’s Bench court in Winnipeg Manitoba, on behalf of Donald J. Woligroski. The suit is for an unspecified amount, bringing forward claims of unlawful use of personal information for commercial purposes.

This suit also deals with default profile settings, raising the question of who determines what information should be made public, and accessible by others. My colleague Robert Scoble has had the opportunity to talk to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg about user trust, particularly as Facebook has taken liberties in default settings in the past year. While Zuckerberg notes the benefits of sharing within a network such as Facebook, many privacy concerns remain as Facebook turns into a money-generating hub for social consumerism.

So who actually rules Facebook and determines what should be default, public or private; the users or the corporate entities? When it comes to privacy, the question is still up in the air, with plenty of points to debate. Who’s information can be shared when, and where, and for what purposes? How can this information be monetized? What does social media privacy really mean?

The very definition of social media privacy is always changing, with each year, each trend, and each enabling device to launch with fanfare. John C. Dvorak places much of the responsibility on the consumer for ensuring their own privacy on an accessible social network, encouraging users to think long-term, instead of being fad-focused. It’s an important consideration to make, though the matter of user info being used to monetize the site reminds us of another long-term goal of Facebook’s.