Meta faces another EU privacy challenge over 'pay for privacy' consent choice
Meta faces another EU privacy challenge over 'pay for privacy' consent choice
Adtech giant Meta's bid to keep tracking and profiling users of Facebook and Instagram in Europe in spite of the bloc's comprehensive data protection laws Adtech giant Meta's bid to keep tracking and profiling users of Facebook and Instagram in Europe in spite of the bloc's comprehensive data protec...
I like that the article consistently refers to Meta as what it is, an adtech giant that also runs social media platforms rather than the other way around.
The EU is doing a few things right these days.
As a Brit who misses the EU a lot they always did a lot right but are underappreciated by the people living in it.
That must suck. I'm sorry your government failed you so hard... It's ridiculous.
I remember a couple of years ago talking about how apple was causing huge amounts of electronic waste and hassle to millions of people by not adopting USB-C on the iphone. Standards are important for many reasons, so I thought about how nice it would be if a government forced them to stop being shitty in that one way, but I knew the US government would never "harm" big business like that. So when I saw the headline in particular about the EU forcing it, I felt like they had answered my prayer even from across the Atlantic ❤️
'pay for privacy' is a hoax and I don't even think Facebook has ever refered to their premium plan as such. It's just a really shitty adblocker that they excpect people to pay for. Your data will still be tracked and processed as normal. It was only media that claimed it had anything to do with privacy in the first place.
Personally i haven't used Facebook or Instagram since they give me the option between payed subscription (actually an insate price, higher than 2-3 streaming services) or to accept targeted ads.
I don't mind ads, but they had removed the option for untargeted ads.
I have also filed a complain to the local data authorities who promised to look in to it, and if not rellevant to themselves, would forward to the right authorities.
I don’t mind ads,
you should.. especially on facebook.
ads on facebook, which includes 'sponsored' bullshit in your feed, are dangerous. links to bogus malware-infested and scareware/support scams are quite common in those. i have a couple users a month, at least, get tripped-up by one of those.
The insane cost is telling how much money they make off of our data. I've always been an advocate for consensual and paid data mining. As in, let me opt into being spied on in exchange for a monthly check based on whichever broker paid for my info. I know it's all lumped into huge datasets where separating it out in a safe, secure manner would be next to impossible, but a man can dream.
I personally don't think that it reflects any value as such. I am pretty sure though, that they don't want it to be a viable option for users to pick, thereby forcing us to accept tracking and targeted ads. Actually, looking deeper into the subscription purchase window, they offer to stop showing ads, but will still show content from commercial accounts as recommended content. So although you may not see an actual ad, if you pay, you will still be shows commercial content, if META feels that it is rellevant to your behaviour
and as always nothing will happen
Meta
paidwas ordered to pay a €1.2 billion fine last year and now tries a different approach to avoid similar fines in the future. This approach ("pay for privacy") will be tried in court and this is where you declare that "Nothing will happen"? Really?As always?
The EU made apple use USB c on iPhones.
The EU made Microsoft make edge uninstallable.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Adtech giant Meta’s bid to keep tracking and profiling users of Facebook and Instagram in Europe in spite of the bloc’s comprehensive data protection laws is facing a second challenge from privacy rights advocacy group noyb.
It’s supporting a new complaint, which is being filed with the Austrian data protection authority, that alleges the company is breaching EU law by framing a choice that makes it far harder for users to withdraw consent to its tracking ads than to agree.
In that case, the decision which finally emerged out of Ireland was actually the DPC acting on instruction from the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), which had to step in to settle disagreements between EU regulators.
“The [Austrian] authority should order Meta to bring its processing operations in compliance with European data protection law and to provide users with an easy way to withdraw their consent — without having to pay a fee,” writes noyb, urging the imposition of a fine “to prevent further violations of the GDPR”.
While all these tortuous regulatory twists and turns have played out, the upshot for Facebook and Instagram users in Europe is that their privacy remains at Mark Zuckerberg’s mercy — unless or until they abandon using his dominant social networks entirely — since, in parallel with all these years of privacy scrutiny and sanction, the adtech giant has been able to keep cashing in on Europeans’ personal data the whole time; processing it for ad targeting despite its legal bases being under challenge or even, for several months-long stretches, invalidated (as happened in the months between its claim of (first) contractual necessity (and then legitimate interests) being ruled out and Meta switching to alternatives (earlier last year legitimate interests; now consent)).
That said, we are seeing more moves to litigate against Meta on privacy — such as the $600M competition damages claim being brought by publishers in Spain last year who argue its lack of legal basis for microtargeting users sums to unfair competition they should be compensated for — so the adtech giant could face a reckoning in the form of rising costs coming down the pipe over legacy data protection violations, as well as the prospect of future sanctions flowing from fresh privacy complaints if they lead to breach findings.
The original article contains 1,575 words, the summary contains 379 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Challenge? Isn't it plain illegal?