8 months ago
Austria Court Rules Meta's Ads Unlawful, Orders EU Data Access
Austria's top court has ruled that Meta's way of showing personalised ads is not legal.
They said Meta must give EU users all their personal data when asked, including details about where the data comes from and how it's used.
The court found that Meta collected data from other apps and websites without properly asking for permission.
This case was started by a privacy activist named Max Schrems in 2014 and took 11 years to be decided.
The court also said Meta can't use sensitive data like political views or health information for ads.
Meta says they have improved their privacy measures and no longer use sensitive data for ads.
EU users can now choose to have personalised ads or pay to avoid data usage for ads.
The court awarded Schrems 500 euros in damages.
Austria's Supreme Court ruled Meta's personalised advertising model unlawful, violating GDPR by collecting user data without proper consent.
Meta must provide EU users full access to their personal data, including sources, recipients, and purposes, within 14 days of a request.
The case, brought by Max Schrems in 2014, took 11 years to resolve and sets a legal precedent across the EU.
The court ordered Meta to cease processing sensitive user data, such as political views or health status, for personalised ads.
Meta disputes the court's findings on third-party data and notes improvements in their privacy measures, including a pay-or-consent model for EU users.
- Who
- Austria's Supreme Court, Meta, Max Schrems
- What
- Ruling that Meta's personalised advertising model is unlawful and orders full EU user data access
- Where
- Austria, with implications across the EU
- When
- Thursday (unspecified date)
- Why
- Meta violated the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by collecting user data without proper consent
Key facts
- Court
- Austria's Supreme Court
- Ruling Date
- Thursday (unspecified date)
- Data Access Requirement
- Full access to personal data within 14 days of request
- GDPR Violation
- Collection of user data from third-party apps and websites without proper consent
- Case Originator
- Max Schrems (Austrian privacy activist)
- Case Duration
- 11 years (since 2014)
- Damages Awarded
- 500 euros ($587)
- Meta's Response
- Reviewing the ruling, disputes findings on third-party data
Quotes
Meta spokesperson
A representative of Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.
“The case pertains to practices from over a decade ago, noting improvements to the company's privacy measures, including investments exceeding 8 billion euros.”
telegraphindia.com
“Meta no longer uses sensitive data for ad personalisation and disputes the Court's findings on third-party data.”
telegraphindia.com
Max Schrems
Austrian privacy activist and founder of the privacy advocacy group noyb.
“Platforms like Facebook or Instagram have huge influence, for example via pushing political views on users. The decision makes clear that Meta must not use such user preferences without explicit consent by each user.”
telegraphindia.com
Sources
Related news
Social Media Companies Intensify Efforts to Identify Child Users
Yorkville America Expands Beyond Trump-Linked ETFs With AI Strategy
Meta’s $18-Billion Child Safety Settlement Faces Praise and Criticism
School Awards Honour Courage, Commitment and Educational Excellence
AI Expansion Puts Jamnagar and Thane Under Water Stress
