Facebook Bows to EU: Will Explain It Makes Money From User Data
The social media giant also made other changes to its terms of service, including a clarification that it can be held liable for misuse of data when it "has not acted with due professional diligence." All of the changes will apply globally.
April 10, 2019 at 03:18 PM
4 minute read
Bowing to pressure from the European Union, Facebook has agreed to change its terms of service so they are no longer what the bloc had called "misleading".
"Today Facebook finally shows commitment to more transparency and straightforward language in its terms of use," Vera Jourová, the European Commissioner for Justice and Consumers, said in a statement on Tuesday, when the announcement was made.
The move is an example of the increasing influence the EU and other governments are exerting on tech companies and social media platforms. The changes, which will take effect in June, will apply globally.
Following revelations that Cambridge Analytica, a U.K. consulting company, had used Facebook users' data for political advertising without their consent, the commission and European consumer organisations called on Facebook to improve transparency of its operations.
As a result, Facebook will change its terms and services to explain that it does not charge users for its service, but it makes money by using personal data to sell targeted advertising. It also has agreed to clarify that it can be held liable for misuse of such data when it "has not acted with due professional diligence". This includes cases in which data has been mishandled by third parties.
In addition, Facebook said that instead of being able to unilaterally change terms and conditions in the future, its ability to make such changes is limited to cases in which the changes are deemed reasonable and also take into account consumer interests.
The social media platform also revised its rules on the temporary retention of content that has been deleted by consumers. Such content can only be retained in specific cases – for instance, to comply with an enforcement request by an authority – and for a maximum of 90 days in case of technical reasons.
"A company that wants to restore consumers' trust after the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal should not hide behind complicated, legalistic jargon on how it is making billions on people's data," Jourova said. "Now, users will clearly understand that their data is used by the social network to sell targeted ads."
The commission and the EU's Consumer Protection Cooperation network will closely monitor the implementation of the new terms of service, and if Facebook is found to have failed to fulfill its commitments, national consumer authorities could decide to resort to enforcement measures, including sanctions.
Facebook and other social media platforms have faced increased scrutiny from governments around the world, with some passing laws that could have a large impact on the tech giants.
Just this month, Australia passed a law that allows huge fines to be imposed on social media companies and even jail time for their executives, if they fail to rapidly remove "abhorrent violent material" from their platforms. That law was passed in the wake of the massacre of 50 people in New Zealand by an Australian white supremacist who used Facebook to live-stream the murders.
New Zealand, where the nation's privacy commissioner called Facebook "morally bankrupt", is considering a similar law. The U.K. is also considering the creation of an independent regulator to make social media companies more responsible.
The EU has also taken other actions: it has imposed big fines on tech firms for violating its sweeping privacy law, known as the GDPR; and it recently changed its copyright law, requiring companies to filter content for copyright violations.
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
© 2024 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 AllAshurst Beijing Chief Representative Leaves for New York Boutique Sterlington
Baker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Axiom-Ince: SFO Charges Five, Including Former Head, Following Investigation
3 minute readSDT Upholds SLAPP Claim Against Osborne Clarke Partner Advising Nadhim Zahawi
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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