EDPO (European Data Protection Office)’s Post

More complaints and litigation against meta in the EU. Are these complaints fair or is it turning into a vendetta? The privacy advocates that are arguing against pay or okay, seem to either be suggesting meta must provide their services without tracking or personalised advertising for free or that £9.99 is to much to ask for. I have issues with both of these, if the objective is to make the platform free, then the EU will simply regulate itself out of the market and these companies will close down their services in the EU (which I’m pretty sure most EU citizens aren’t demanding and don’t want). The second argument that £9.99 is to much, is also absurd, meta is marking more than this in the US from advertising funding (and most likely in the UK, although they don’t report these), the EU market makes less, but has seen continued growth in recent years, so the pricing of the two tiers seems to have parity. We seem to have gone past the point of demanding transparency and choice, which I have always advocated for and into more dangerous regulatory territory, which has less clear benefits for EU citizens. I’m also unclear on where the demand for this regulation comes from, I’m not sure EU citizens are out on the streets demanding this, it seems to be largely driven by the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels’s? https://lnkd.in/ekzCe27i

This is a story that stems from #Meta's refusal to face reality: business models that depend on the commodification of personal data are doomed in the long run. They are too toxic for society and therefore unsustainable. Article by Natasha Lomas "Meta is facing a major legal challenge and damages claim in Spain that argues the adtech giant’s years of failing to have a valid legal basis for processing people’s data for ads under European Union data protection rules also constitutes a competition breach for which they should be compensated financially." "AMI, an association of newspaper owners whose more than 80 members include the publishers of newspapers including El País, ABC and La Vanguardia, is behind the suit. The litigants are seeking more than €550 million (~$600M) for what they describe as Meta’s “systematic and massive non-compliance” with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (#GDPR)." The "lawsuit argues 100% of Meta’s regional revenue was unlawfully obtained" (because of an "illegitimately obtained competitive advantage”). "Meta, the owner of #Facebook and #Instagram, was hit with a fine of €390M back in January after EU data protection authorities confirmed performance of a contract was not a valid legal basis for it to track and profile users to target them with ads." "Since the January penalty, Meta has twice switched the legal basis it claims for ads processing in the region." And still it doesn't learn. Ads don't need to suveil. https://lnkd.in/eDg5BN8u

Not much time has passed since the last time Facebook's privacy policy was in the news. By the end of March the entity announced switching its legal basis for behavioural advertising purposes from the performance of contract need (which had been judged illegal by the Irish DPC in January, leading to a 390 million euros fine) to its legitimate interest. However, yesterday the company changed direction and announced its intention to change the legal basis again in favour to "consent". The truth is that this recent decision seems appropriate given that the legitimate interest seems e-Privacy Directive sets out consent as the only valid legal basis for gaining acces to the information stored in the terminal equipment of an user. However, it is not clear yet how this decision is to be implemented and some worry that Meta may incur in dark patterns (practice that would render consent invalid) in order to foster getting individuals consent. Nonetheless it must be recalled that many of the Meta platform users are minors and, as per GDPR, consent is not valid when given by a minor of less than 16 years old (although member states can reduce this age to a minimum of 13 years old, and some of them, such as Spain, have reduced it accordingly). Additionally, article 28.2 of the recent Digital Services Act bans carrying out profiling techniques for the purpose of offering behavoural ads when the platform providers are aware with reasonable certainty that the user is a minor. https://lnkd.in/d4PpNt4g

🚨 Big News: Meta Introduces Paid Subscription in Europe! 📲 Enjoy ad-free Facebook & Instagram for a monthly fee. 🔍 Could this reshape U.S. privacy laws? Be prepared. 💡 At Hungry Robot, we're adapting to these changes with innovative, ROI-driven strategies. Let us help you stay ahead of the curve. #Meta #PrivacyLaws #DigitalMarketing #Innovation #MiromaGroup

Is it okay to "Pay for Your Rights"? Meta is now asking $14 per month or $168 annually to use its platforms for users in the EU, EEA and Switzerland. Check out the new article on Meta's Privacy Pivot: Pay or Give Your Data? Unveiling the "Pay for Your Rights" Dilemma that we prepared together with Ceren Ceyhan!

📉 Meta has almost halved the price of its "Pay or Okay" scheme (from €9.99 to €5.99) in an effort "to balance the conflicting demands of EU privacy laws and the DMA", according to Reuters: https://lnkd.in/e4BduE_G. 📋 We recently reported on a new complaint by data privacy activists from noyb that the Meta's scheme is not GDPR compliant (https://lnkd.in/eafrTxWc) and gave its background (https://lnkd.in/eSKaCQtg). ⚔ noyb instantly reacted to Meta's pricing move, estimating that in some EU Member States the annual cost of privacy for users would exceed €1,500 and arguing that, we quote, "more and more companies will follow the example and switch to 'Pay or Okay', rendering the fundamental right to privacy virtually useless": https://lnkd.in/eNJfUxKD. 🔬 Recent scientific studies (https://lnkd.in/ernVAWpV), according to noyb, show that the problem with the "Pay or Okay" scheme is not only about cost: users will basically choose "Okay" if they are offered to pay even a very small amount as an alternative, which may be an indication that such consent is not "freely given". 💡 We at ESPE suppose, awaiting the EDPB's decision on this matter, that the "Pay or Okay" scheme, if approved, will not only be reused for the purpose of personalized advertising. The processing of personal data for the training of AI models may also be affected. Users will have to pay or participate in feeding their data to LLMs, which need to be fueled by fresh data to produce good results. 📣 If you need advice on choosing the appropriate legal basis to process personal data and on GDPR compliance, we at ESPE will be happy to help: legal@especg.com📨, https://especg.com/, www.especg.com. You can learn more about our Data Protection services at https://lnkd.in/e56pvSut. #meta #facebook #instagram #gdpr #gdprcompliance #dataprivacy #dataprotection #edpb #noyb #success #ESPE

I love the anti-business attitudes of the EU which has become nothing more than an organized crime protection racket. Everyone wants a piece of that ad revenue cash. Nobody really cares about protecting users, and users don't really care that their data is used to target advertisements. The EU data protection regime is a systematic shakedown regime. Plain and simple. Now the "competition" wants a piece of that revenue they never had to work for too. It's hilarious. The entire EU has become an institutionally sanctioned racketeering organization. Ask the average citizen if they feel protected by the EU. They'll laugh and ask what you're talking about, I guarantee it.

🌐 How often do you get frustrated with ads arising your random one-time search? Let's talk targeted Advertising Today, I bring to your attention a significant development in the world of data privacy and digital ethics. Norway has recently accused Meta (formerly known as Facebook) of harvesting vast amounts of citizen data without proper consent and using this for targeted advertising. According to reports, ( https://lnkd.in/eAZf5xzV ) Norway's data protection authority has demanded that Meta address this and to enforce compliance, the authority has imposed a staggering fine of $100,000 daily! I encourage all of us to reflect on this and engage in constructive discussions about data privacy and the role of companies in safeguarding user information. As the CEO of RisKey striving for best practices in the digital privacy landscape, we must stay informed about issues that impact data protection, privacy, and user rights. The allegations against Meta raise important questions about the ethical use of data and the responsibility companies have to their users and society at large in today's digital age. As data-driven professionals, we must advocate for responsible data usage, both in our organizations and within the industry as a whole. I will be closely monitoring updates, and I invite all of you to share your thoughts, insights, and suggestions in the comments below. #DataPrivacy #DigitalEthics #TechIndustry #UserRights #EthicalTech #linkedinnewseurope

💭 An intriguing development in the world of digital advertising and user privacy: Meta is now required to obtain explicit consent from its European users for targeted ads. This shift presents a choice: continue using Facebook for free with personalized ads (⚠ AKA they collect the individual's data) or pay for an ad-free experience. It's a compelling situation that raises questions about the value of privacy and the cost of digital rights. As we navigate these complex issues, it's vital to stay informed and critically assess the impact on user experience and privacy rights. This article offers a detailed look into Meta's new approach and its implications. Worth a read for anyone interested in the intersection of technology, advertising, and privacy laws.