Meta has been given until September 1, 2024 to respond to concerns raised by the European Commission about its “pay or consent” advertising model or risk enforcement measures, including sanctions.
European Commission said Consumer cooperative (PDA) The network told the social media giant that the model adopted by Facebook and Instagram could potentially violate consumer protection laws.
He described the new practice as misleading and confusing, with authorities expressing concern that consumers could be forced to quickly choose between paying for a monthly subscription or consenting to the use of their personal data for targeted advertising.
This, according to the agency, could be motivated by the fear that they would “instantly lose access to their accounts and network of contacts”.
Meta, which introduced a subscription plan for European Union (EU) users at the end of 2023, run into hot water for offering what is essentially no choice and for charging a “privacy fee” to exercise their data protection rights.
Under the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), gatekeeper companies must ask users for their express consent before using their data to offer services that go beyond their core function (such as advertising) or provide access to a less personalized but equivalent version of platforms for those who refuse to subscribe.
“Gatekeepers cannot use the service or certain features without user consent,” the Commission said earlier this month, saying the Meta model violates the DMA.
The commission also accused Meta of using vague terms and labeling the service as “free” when in fact it forces consumers to agree to have their data used for personalized advertising, not to mention confusing the experience by forcing them to “navigate across screens” to determine how their data is used and processed for advertising purposes.
Meta, however, considers the paid version a legitimate business model and points to a ruling The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) last July said that the company could offer an equivalent alternative version of its service “for an appropriate fee” that does not rely on the collection of data for advertising.
That being said, it’s worth noting here that the decision applies to users who subscribe to Meta’s services, not existing users (where the aforementioned issues related to changes in the consent model arise). It remains to be seen whether this can be interpreted as a legal precedent.
“Consumers should not be led into thinking that they will pay and no longer see ads, or get a service for free, if instead they agree that a company has used their personal data to generate advertising revenue,” Didier said. This was stated by the European Commissioner for Justice Reynders.
“Traders must inform consumers in advance and in full transparency about how they use their personal data. This is a fundamental right that we will defend.”
The development comes days after Nigeria’s Federal Competition and Consumer Commission (FCCPC) fined Meta $220 million after an investigation found the company’s data sharing with Facebook and WhatsApp violated local consumer protection laws data and privacy by collecting user information without their consent. .
“The Meta Parties must immediately and immediately cease the process of sharing WhatsApp user information with other Facebook companies and third parties until users actively and voluntarily consent to each component of the freedoms that the Meta Parties intend to exercise with respect to Subject Information data”, final order released read last week.
Earlier in May this year, the Turkish board competition imposed $37.20 million fine against the US tech giant for data-sharing practices on Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp.
It also follows from a the report that Oracle agreed to pay $115 million to settle a US class action lawsuit that accused the database software and cloud computing company of violating users’ privacy by collecting their personal information and selling it to third parties.
Meanwhile, Google is the target of a new investigation by Italy’s data protection authority into how it obtains users’ consent before combining personal data from different services and whether it provides enough information to influence that choice.
“Google may use methods and techniques to request consent, as well as to set up mechanisms for obtaining consent, which may affect the freedom of choice of the average consumer,” the Guarantor guarantees. allegedly.
“Indeed, a customer would be induced to make a commercial decision that he/she would not otherwise have made by consenting to the pooling and cross-use of his/her personal data among the multitude of services offered.”
