Meta’s ad-free subscription service in Europe faces new regulatory challenges. The Consumer Protection Cooperative Network (CPC) today issued a notice to the company, calling on it to explain and potentially amend its marketing of the options, as it believes they are currently misleading.
In summary, last November, Meta has launched an ad-free subscription package in Europe, allowing EU users to opt out of both ads and data tracking by paying a monthly fee, which aligns with the EU’s new permission requirements. The idea here is that this option will allow Meta to maintain its revenue stream while complying with the new regulations.
However, privacy advocates were quick to raise concerns about the plan, arguing that Meta was forcing people to pay for a service that should be provided free of charge. EU regulations require users to have clear control over how their data is used, and Meta’s subscription packages benefit from this element, which they argue goes against the spirit of the law.
The results of a survey earlier this month showed that European Commission bans Meta’s ad-free subscription plan surely, Digital Markets Act (DMA)The company had a chance to respond before it was fined over the program.
Now, through a separate investigation, the CPC has found that Meta’s ad-free package doesn’t make the process clear enough to users.
According to the findings:
“The consumer protection authorities assessed several elements that may constitute misleading or abusive conduct, in particular whether Meta provided consumers with truthful, clear and sufficient information in advance. They analyzed whether this information enabled consumers to understand the impact on their rights as consumers of their decision to pay or to accept the processing of their personal data for commercial purposes. Furthermore, the CPC authorities are concerned that many consumers may have been under undue pressure to rush into choosing one of the two models, fearing that they would immediately lose access to their accounts and contact networks.“
The CPC’s view was that Meta’s ad-free offer misleads users with its language and puts undue pressure on users in deciding whether to select a subscription plan, but that Meta’s overall documentation for its packages is It also creates confusion.
“By preventing consumers who have been using Facebook/Instagram for free until the new business models were implemented, and for whom Facebook/Instagram is a significant part of their social lives and interactions,[the program]pressures them to make an immediate choice without prior warning, sufficient time, and a real opportunity to evaluate how that choice will affect their contractual relationship with Meta, by preventing them from accessing their accounts before they can make a choice.”
This is a strange argument. The problem here is that both the CDC and the EU Commission seem to acknowledge that Facebook and Instagram are essential utilities for connecting. But they are not government-owned organizations; they are businesses, and therefore have the right to operate as they see fit.
So it’s unclear whether Meta can legally argue that it can’t charge for its services, especially if these new requirements impact its revenue. But both groups seem to be arguing that Meta needs to continue offering its services for free, make it clear that users can avoid paying extra, and limit its use of personal data.
Meta, then, appears to be presenting evidence in support of its efforts, but also considering cooperation with EU authorities in order to maintain business relations.
Meta has already offered to halve the price of its ad-free package to appease EU regulators.
This is a bit of a tricky case and an interesting challenge for any new EU regulations, as a ruling in favor of meth could establish a legal precedent for similar cases, which could weaken regulations overall. Digital Markets Act (DMA)EU authorities would strongly oppose this.
Either way, this is a new challenge for Meta in the EU and may mean changes to the services it can provide.
Meta has until September 1, 2024 to respond to the CPC’s notice.
