Facebook Will Appeal German Data Processing Restrictions, Associate General Counsel Says
German antitrust regulators claim Facebook forced users to consent to its collection of their data from third-party apps and websites, and its assignment of that data to their personal Facebook profiles. Facebook will now need voluntary consent to collect and assign such data. The company said it plans to appeal the order.
February 07, 2019 at 02:10 PM
3 minute read
German antitrust authorities restricted Facebook's ability to assign data from third-party apps to users' profiles Thursday, a move the company disagreed with and said it intends to appeal.
Germany's Federal Cartel Office, the Bundeskartellamt, said Facebook can continue to collect data from apps it owns, including WhatsApp and Instagram, but can't assign data from the apps to users' Facebook profiles without voluntary consent. Facebook will no longer be able to collect German users' data from third-party websites without voluntary consent.
“Voluntary consent means that the use of Facebook's services must not be subject to the users' consent to their data being collected and combined in this way,” Bundeskartellamt president Andreas Mundt said in a press release. “If users do not consent, Facebook may not exclude them from its services and must refrain from collecting and merging data from different sources.”
He said Facebook used its market power to force users into allowing “practically unrestricted collection” of their data from non-Facebook sources.
In a blog post published shortly after the decision, Facebook Ireland's head of data protection Yvonne Cunnane and director and associate general counsel Nikhil Shanbhag said the “decision misapplies German competition law to set different rules that apply to only one company.”
“Every day, people interact with companies that connect and use data in similar ways. And all of this should be—and is—a legitimate area of focus for regulators and policymakers around the world. Yet the Bundeskartellamt is trying to implement an unconventional standard for a single company,” Cunnane and Shanbhag said in the post.
The two outlined Facebook's argument against Germany's restrictions: that popularity in a market is not necessarily dominance, with 40 percent of Germans not using Facebook, that sharing data across apps and websites can improve services and safety and that the company complies with the European Union's General Data Protection Regulations.
Facebook's data processing should be regulated by data authorities rather than anti-competition authorities, Cunnane and Shanbhag said, adding Germany's order “threatens to undermine this.” The Mountain View, California-based company has its European headquarters in Dublin, falling under the Irish Data Protection Commission's jurisdiction.
“This is the point we'll continue to make to the Bundeskartellamt and defend these important arguments in court, so that people and businesses in Germany can continue to benefit from all of our services,” Cunnane and Shanbhag said.
Read More:
Massive $5B Fine Against Google Highlights Long-Term Shift in EU, US Antitrust Enforcement
Facebook Messaging Merger Could Face GDPR Complications, Irish Commission Warns
Google's GDPR Fine Is a Warning for Tech Company GCs: Double Check Data Consent Policies
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
Aggressive FTC May Force Merging Companies to Bolster Legal Defenses
4 minute readBest Legal Departments: How Blackstone's Legal and Compliance Team Got the All-Clear to Grow Business
CEOs Want Data-Based Risk Management; GCs Lack the Tech to Do So.
Trending Stories
- 1K&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
- 2'Better of the Split': District Judge Weighs Circuit Divide in Considering Who Pays Decades-Old Medical Bill
- 3Which Georgia Courts Are Closed Today?—Here's a List
- 4After DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
- 5People in the News—Jan. 23, 2025—Marshall Dennehey, Duane Morris, Hangley Aronchick
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250