Meta has been accused of violating European law with its 'pay or consent' model

By D. Maan, Jadetimes News

---

Image Source : NurPhoto

---

Meta's Controversial "Pay or Consent" Model

---

Facebook's parent company, Meta, has been accused of violating Europe’s new digital competition rules with its "pay or consent" advertising model. In late 2023, Meta introduced a service called "Subscription for no ads," allowing European users of Facebook and Instagram to pay up to €12.99 ($14) a month for ad free versions of these platforms. Alternatively, users could choose to accept versions with personalized ads.

---

European Commission's Preliminary Findings

---

The European Commission stated on Monday that, in its preliminary view, this binary choice forces users to consent to the use of their personal data without offering a less personalized but equivalent version of Meta’s social networks. If the Commission's provisional findings are confirmed, the EU could impose a fine equivalent to 10% of Meta's global annual revenue under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Based on Meta’s 2023 results, this fine could amount to $13.5 billion. Meta, however, disagreed with the Commission's findings, asserting that "Subscription for no ads" complies with the DMA and follows the direction of Europe's highest court.

---

Broader Implications and Investigations

---

The EU’s announcement regarding Meta comes shortly after the Commission accused Apple of breaching the DMA by restricting app developers from directing consumers to cheaper services. Additionally, regulators are investigating Google parent Alphabet under the new law. The DMA, effective since March, mandates that dominant online platforms, known as gatekeepers, provide users with more choices and create more opportunities for competitors. Online platforms frequently collect personal data across their own and third party services for use in digital advertising.

Image Source : Bloomberg

---

Empowering User Control Over Data

---

Margrethe Vestager, a European Commissioner responsible for competition policy, emphasized that Meta has been accumulating personal data from millions of EU citizens for many years. She highlighted the Commission’s goal to empower citizens to control their own data and choose a less personalized ads experience. Michael Koenig, a senior official at the Commission, stated that Meta must offer an alternative to "full" ad personalization that does not rely on personal data, ensuring it is automatically less personalized but still available. He added that Meta is free to maintain additional options, such as a subscription to remove ads entirely or a premium features package. The Commission aims to conclude its investigation into Meta by late March next year.

Supreme Court Rules on Trump's Limited Immunity in January 6 Case, Potentially Affecting Trial Timeline Before Election

By W. G. S. D. Wijesinghe, Jadetimes News

---

Image Source : Kevin Dietsch

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that former President Donald Trump could claim immunity from criminal prosecution for certain actions taken during his presidency. This decision is expected to delay the federal election subversion trial against him.

In a closely watched case, the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision overturned a federal appeals court ruling from February that denied Trump immunity for actions aimed at reversing the 2020 election results. The court's liberals dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor issuing a strong dissent criticizing the decision.

Image Source : Win McNamee

Chief Justice Robert's Opinion

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure. For the President’s core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.” However, he also stated that the President has no immunity for unofficial acts and is not above the law. The trial court must now assess which of Trump's alleged actions are considered official or unofficial, requiring additional briefings.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s Concurrence

Justice Amy Coney Barrett expressed frustration with the decision to remand the case for further proceedings, suggesting that some of the case could proceed as Trump's broad challenge to the indictment failed. She disagreed with excluding evidence from Trump’s official acts, advocating for a standard procedure that includes such evidence.

Trump welcomed the decision, calling it a “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY” on Truth Social. His legal team believes the ruling could undermine special counsel Jack Smith’s case, potentially excluding communications between Trump and then-Vice President Mike Pence or Department of Justice officials from the trial.

Image Source : Bill Pugliano

Biden Campaign's Criticism

The Biden campaign criticized the Supreme Court, accusing it of enabling Trump to act without accountability. The ruling complicates Smith’s case, as the high court specified that unofficial actions are not immune, but left it to lower courts to distinguish between official and private actions. The majority also stated that official acts could not be used as evidence, potentially making it harder to prove Trump’s motives.

Justice Sotomayor’s Dissent

Justice Sotomayor, writing for the dissenting liberal justices, condemned the ruling for placing the President above the law, warning of potential abuses of power and a shift in the President’s relationship with the people.

EU Targets Meta with New Charges in Ongoing Big Tech Crackdown

By C. Perera, JadeTimes News

---

Image Source : Dado Ruvic

The European Commission has accused Meta of violating the EU’s Digital Markets Act with its new “pay or consent” advertising model. This charge, announced on Monday, comes in response to Meta's introduction of a no ads subscription service for Facebook and Instagram in Europe last November. This action is part of the EU’s ongoing scrutiny of Big Tech since the DMA was enacted earlier this year.

Meta's model offers users a choice between accepting targeted ads based on their personal data or paying to avoid them. This system was implemented following an EU ruling that required Meta to obtain user consent before displaying ads, posing a threat to Meta's business model that relies on personalized advertising.

However, the EC argues that this binary option does not allow users to "freely consent" to the use of their personal data from various Meta operated sites. Additionally, a preliminary investigation revealed that Meta does not provide a less personalized but equivalent version of its social networks.

EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager stated, “We want to empower citizens to be able to take control over their own data and choose a less personalised ads experience.” Violations of the DMA could lead to fines of up to 10 percent of a company’s global annual revenue.