EU watchdog rejects Meta's 'pay for privacy' attempt
Can't charge for data privacy
Meta's attempt to charge European users for ad-free browsing on Facebook and Instagram has been dealt a major blow by EU regulators.
The EU's data protection watchdog, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), has ruled that Facebook owner Meta cannot force users to pay for data privacy as part of its ad-free subscription service.
The decision comes after several EU regulators challenged Meta's "pay or consent" model, which allows users to opt out of data sharing for targeted advertising for a monthly fee.
The issue stems from a landmark EU court decision last July, which stripped Meta of its legal right to track users across platforms without explicit consent. Following the court ruling, Meta introduced paid subscriptions for ad-free browsing.
However, privacy advocates argued this wasn't true consent. They pointed out the hefty price tag, initially €12.99, which dropped to €5.99 in March, essentially forcing users to choose between being tracked or paying a monthly fee.
The EDPB argues in its latest decision [pdf] that Meta' system doesn't constitute "freely given" consent, a key requirement of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
"In most cases, it will not be possible for large online platforms to comply with the requirements for valid consent if they confront users only with a binary choice between consenting to processing of personal data for behavioural advertising purposes and paying a fee," the EDPB said.
Anu Talus, Chair of the EDPB, noted that the current "consent or pay" models used by platforms usually don't offer users a genuine choice, forcing them to either surrender their data entirely or pay a fee.
This leads to most users consenting without truly comprehending the consequences of their decision, she added.
Meta, unsurprisingly, disagrees. The company pointed to an EU court ruling that it says allows subscriptions as a valid option and that its model complies with EU law.
Privacy advocates applauded the EDPB's decision.
Max Schrems, a prominent privacy activist, hailed the decision, stating Meta is "out of options" and must now offer a true yes/no option for personalised ads.
According to Schrems, Meta's model pressured users into giving up control of their data, adding that alternative revenue streams like contextual advertising and page-reach fees remain viable.
However, the decision sparked concerns from the tech industry. CCIA Europe, a tech lobby group, says it sets a dangerous precedent.
"Forcing businesses to offer services at a loss is unprecedented and sends the wrong signals," said Claudia Canelles Quaroni, a senior policy manager at CCIA Europe. "All companies should be able to offer paid-for versions of their services."
This latest development adds to Meta's string of legal defeats in the EU regarding data privacy.
Previous attempts to justify user tracking – through user agreements, "legitimate interest" claims, and finally, the subscription model – have all been rejected by regulators.
The company is expected to appeal the EDPB's opinion, but it remains unclear how it will adapt its services to comply with stricter data privacy regulations in the EU.