Consumer groups are systematically campaigning in the EU to use data protection laws to stop Meta from giving local users a “false choice” between paying a fee or consenting to data collection. have filed a complaint.
Basically, as any reader who’s based in the European Union, European Economic Area (EEA) or Switzerland and dabbles in Facebook or Instagram knows, Mark Zuckerberg’s company has been operating within the EU since late last year. Deploying service changes.
If you have an aunt on FB or a friend on Instagram, you can say “Yes” to data processing, “Choose to continue using Facebook and Instagram with ads” or “Subscription service without ads on Facebook and Instagram”. I was asked if I would like to pay the fee. . ” Of course, Mehta made this change to comply with her EU law.
But privacy rights officials were not happy about this from the beginning. For example, the privacy advocacy group noyb (None Of Your Business) sarcastically pointed out that Meta is essentially offering to pay a fee to enjoy fundamental rights under EU law. . The group had already challenged Meta’s move in November, arguing that EU law requires consent to data processing to be provided freely, rather than in exchange for a fee. . Noyb also filed a lawsuit in January challenging the fact that users cannot “freely” withdraw consent they have already given to Facebook and Instagram to process their data.
The complaint filed today by eight members of the European Consumer Organization (BEUC) is based on European data protection law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), rather than consumer law. A previous complaint by the group of 19 people focused on Meta’s business practices, which offered consumers “opportunities for privacy-friendly options with less tracking and tracing by choosing the paid subscription offered.” They argued that it was unfair because it “misleads people to believe that they can get a good deal.” Profiling. ” These consumer lawsuits also argued that the platforms’ market dominance meant that users had no real choice.
Today’s GDPR complaint from BEUC alleges that Meta’s payment or consent model violates the law’s data protection principles, including the principles of purpose limitation, data minimization, fair processing and transparency, and that the processing It is claimed that the company is able to “infer the personal information of personal information.” consumer. “
The group also argues that Meta does not have a valid legal basis under the GDPR to process data for advertising because it relies on consent. Additionally, since the social media giant has not made it clear that Meta’s purpose is required by the relevant agreement or that “profiling” is consistent with the Data Principles, Meta has been given “for content personalization” It also claims that it is unable to explain the legality of the processing. Minimize. Finally, Eurogroup says in its complaint that the model is characterized by “a lack of transparency, unforeseen processing, [the] It is the use of a dominant position to force consent or to switch legal bases in a way that prevents data subjects from exercising their rights. ”
Each group plans to submit to its own national data protection watchdog today.
meta said The Leg The company disputed the allegations, adding: “We take our regulatory obligations extremely seriously and are confident that our approach is GDPR compliant.”
It added that it believes Meta’s “ad-free subscription” model “aligns with the latest regulatory developments, guidance and rulings shared by major European regulators and courts in recent years.” . Specifically, it follows the instructions given by the European Supreme Court. In July, the Court of Justice of the European Union approved the subscription model as a way for people to consent to data processing for personalized advertising. ”
The lawsuit is the latest for Meta, which has struggled to comply with EU law. Last year, the company avoided a record €1.2 billion GDPR fine imposed by the Irish Data Protection Commission for “systematic, repeated and continuous” transfers of data belonging to EU residents to the US. did.
The social media giant also had to wait until December last year to launch Twitter rival Threads in the European Union. This was a full five months after its release in other parts of the world. Mehta said the delay was due to “unique regulatory requirements” within the bloc, but Elon Musk’s company is in the mix as Bluesky and Mastodon battle to take market share from Twitter. This was unavoidable in the competition to increase traction. Access to Twitter/X’s API is out of reach for many people.
Risk factors in all Meta SEC filings indicate that “government restrictions on access to Facebook or other actions that impair our ability to sell advertising in each country” could be an issue for the social media giant. Of course it is stated that there is. And more recently, the EU’s Digital Markets and Digital Services Act has kept GDPR companies in place after adding that disclaimer to their SEC filings.
Still, judging from Meta’s financial situation, it hasn’t been hit that hard. On February 1, 2024, Meta issued its “first-ever quarterly cash dividend.” Meta earned $131.948 billion of its $134.9 billion in revenue in 2023 from advertising.
Meta said in its 10K earlier this month that its app family division (Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp, and other services) saw revenue increase in 2023 by $18.56 billion (16%) compared to 2022. He announced the following: It was driven almost entirely by advertising revenue. ” ®
