Meta Settles UK Ad-Tracking Lawsuit - Right to Object

Meta Agrees to Halt Data Tracking for Targeted Ads Following Legal Challenge

Tanya O’Carroll, a dedicated human rights advocate, has successfully compelled social media behemoth Meta to cease utilizing her personal data for the purpose of targeted advertising. This outcome is formalized in a settlement stemming from an individual legal challenge she initiated against Meta’s data tracking and profiling practices in 2022.

Legal Basis of the Challenge

O’Carroll’s argument centered on the existing legal right, as enshrined in both U.K. and E.U. data protection legislation, to object to the employment of personal data for direct marketing purposes. Furthermore, she asserted that an absolute right exists to prevent further processing of personal data when an objection is raised by the user. This, she contended, obligated Meta to honor her objection and discontinue the tracking and profiling activities used to deliver its highly specific advertisements.

Initially, Meta disputed this claim, maintaining that its “personalized ads” do not constitute direct marketing. However, the case, which was scheduled for hearing in the English High Court on Monday, has been resolved through this settlement, effectively ending the legal proceedings.

A Precedent for User Privacy

The agreement represents a significant individual victory for O’Carroll, as Meta is now legally bound to refrain from using her data for ad targeting across its services. She also believes this settlement establishes a crucial precedent. It should empower others to confidently exercise their right to object to direct marketing, thereby forcing the technology giant to respect user privacy.

In a discussion with TechCrunch, O’Carroll explained that agreeing to the settlement became the logical course of action once Meta conceded to her core demand – the cessation of data processing for targeted advertising. She highlighted the potential for substantial financial repercussions had she proceeded with the litigation and ultimately been unsuccessful.

Bittersweet Outcome and Ongoing Concerns

“This is a victory with mixed emotions,” she stated. “I have, in many respects, accomplished my initial goal – demonstrating the validity of the right to object and its direct applicability to Meta’s business model, and indeed to many similar companies operating online, confirming that targeted advertising is, in fact, a form of direct marketing.”

“I believe I have demonstrated this point effectively. However, it’s important to note that this hasn’t been legally determined. Meta hasn’t accepted liability; they maintain they simply settled with an individual case.”

Enforcement Challenges and GDPR

Despite the long-standing comprehensive legal safeguards for personal information within the E.U., such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – the foundation upon which the U.K.’s data protection framework is built – enforcing these laws against surveillance-driven advertising models like Meta’s has proven to be a complex and often frustrating process.

Numerous GDPR complaints against the company have resulted in a protracted period of regulatory challenges since the regulation’s implementation in May 2018.

While Meta has incurred substantial GDPR fines, including some of the largest ever levied against technology companies, its fundamental consentless surveillance business model has remained remarkably resilient. However, indications suggest that enforcement actions are gradually eroding this position within Europe, and O’Carroll’s case underscores the viability of privacy-focused resistance.

ICO Support and Future Strategies

“What provides me with optimism is the intervention of the ICO [U.K.’s Information Commissioner’s Office] in this case,” O’Carroll added. “They unequivocally and persuasively supported my position.” She suggests that other Meta users who assert their right to object to data processing may find the ICO more inclined to intervene on their behalf should Meta disregard their requests.

O’Carroll anticipates that Meta will likely transition to a “pay or consent” model in the U.K., mirroring the approach it adopted in the E.U. last year. This model necessitates users either provide consent for tracking and profiling or subscribe to ad-free versions of Meta’s services.

While O’Carroll is unable to disclose the specifics of the tracking-free access she will receive, she has confirmed that she will not be required to pay Meta for this privilege.