Meta faces another EU privacy challenge over 'pay for privacy' consent choice

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.

'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.

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?

and as always nothing will happen