Human rights activist Tanya O’Carroll has managed to force the social media giant meta to not use data in targeted ads. The agreement is included in the settlement of individual challenges she filed for Meta’s tracing and profiling in 2022.
O’Carroll argued that, together with the legal rights to oppose the use of personal data for direct marketing included in the UK (and EU) data protection laws, and the ineligible rights that mean that user objects no longer process personal data for such purposes, Meta respected her objections and argued that she must track and profile her to provide a micro-target ADS.
Meta refuted this – claiming that “personalized ads” are not direct marketing. The case was scheduled to be heard in the UK High Court on Monday, but the settlement ends legal action.
In the case of O’Carroll, it’s an individual victory. Meta must stop using data for ad targeting when using the Service. She also believes that the settlement will set a precedent that will allow the tech giant to confidently exercise the same rights he opposes marketing to enforce privacy.
O’Carroll told TechCrunch about the outcome and explained that after Meta agreed to what her legal action had asked for, he had little choice to agree to a settlement (i.e., not processing data from targeted ads). If she went on and the lawsuit failed, she could have faced considerable costs, she said.
“It’s a bittersweet victory,” she said. “In many ways, it is to prove that I have a right to oppose it, and to prove that it applies precisely to meta’s business model and many other companies on the internet.
“And I think I showed that it was a fact, but of course it wasn’t determined by law. Mesa didn’t have to accept responsibility.
While the EU has long implemented comprehensive legal protections for people’s information such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the UK’s national data protection framework remains based and implements these privacy laws for surveillance-based AD business models such as one meta-op.
Since the administration came into effect in May 2018, years of regulatory bludgeoning have been unfolding in connection with multiple GDPR complaints about businesses.
Meta has also won a significant number of GDPR fines, including some of Tech’s biggest privacy fines in history, but its core unconsensual surveillance business model has proven to be difficult to shift. There are indications that enforcement measures have finally been cut off in this European position. And the O’Carroll example emphasizes that privacy pushback is possible.
“What gives me hope is that the ICO (the UK Information Commissioner’s Office) intervened in the case and was with me, very obvious and incredibly persuasive.
That said, she believes the company is likely to move to the UK “salary or consent” model. This is the legal basis for moving in the EU last year. This requires users to agree to tracking and profiling or pay meta to access the ad-free version of the service.
O’Carroll said he could not disclose details of the untracked access meta, but confirmed that he would not have to pay for the meta.