Tensions Renew Between Meta and Privacy Advocate NOYB Over European Data Use
The ongoing dispute between Meta, the social media giant led by Mark Zuckerberg, and the Austrian privacy advocacy group NOYB (None Of Your Business) has escalated anew. On May 14th, NOYB announced its intention to seek a court order to halt Meta’s planned use of European user data, a move that could expose the company to potential damages claims.
The core issue revolves around Meta’s proposed use of personal information collected from its European users on platforms including Facebook and Instagram. NOYB asserts that this data collection and processing are set to begin on May 27th, unless halted.
Meta justifies this large-scale data collection by citing the legal basis of “legitimate interest” under Article 6 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The company claims that it intends to utilize these data to train and refine its AI models, including those of generative AI, and potentially share these tools with third parties. However, last month, Meta clarified that users would be informed beforehand and given a link to oppose this data use for training purposes. The company also assured that private messages and public data from accounts belonging to users under 18 would not be involved in these training activities.
NOYB proposes GDPR-compliant alternatives
Max Schrems, a prominent privacy activist leading NOYB, sharply rejects Meta’s reliance on the “legitimate interest” argument. He points out that the European Court of Justice has explicitly ruled that Meta cannot base targeted advertising activities—which are central to its business—on this legal ground. Schrems questions, “How could Meta possibly have a ‘legitimate interest’ in collecting all this data for AI training?”
The privacy advocate emphasizes that there are GDPR-compliant options available, which include implementing a transparent and explicit “yes/no” consent process for data used in AI training. He also highlights the need to explore technical solutions respectful of privacy, such as using anonymized data, already a recognized method to develop AI models without infringing on personal privacy.
Legal Actions and Potential Financial Impacts
In response to Meta’s plans, NOYB has taken concrete action by sending a “cease and desist” letter to the tech giant on the same day. The organization is currently evaluating further legal steps that could involve filing injunctions to prevent Meta’s data use before May 27th. It has set a deadline of May 21st for Meta to respond to its letter.
Beyond legal proceedings, the stakes are high from an economic standpoint. NOYB is exploring the possibility of a class action suit under the European Union’s collective redress mechanism, which enables groups of consumers to sue companies collectively for damages. Max Schrems has estimated the potential financial exposure for Meta: considering that over 400 million Europeans use Meta’s services, and assuming damages of around €500 per user, the total potential claim could run into billions of euros.
Schrems remarks, “If all these users claim damages, the liability could total several billion euros,” highlighting the significant financial risks that Meta faces should the court side with NOYB or if a class action is launched.
Implications for Meta and the Tech Industry
The outcome of this legal confrontation could have profound consequences beyond Meta’s European operations. It may influence how technology companies across the sector approach data collection, user consent, and AI development within the strict boundaries of GDPR. This case underscores the ongoing tension between technological innovation and privacy rights, especially in the European context where data protection laws are among the strictest worldwide.
Meta’s future strategies regarding AI training and data handling in Europe are at stake, and a verdict against the company could set a precedent affecting similar practices elsewhere. As the industry awaits the legal developments, the case serves as a critical reminder of the importance of GDPR compliance and transparent data practices in the digital economy.
This legal dispute illustrates the growing importance of privacy protections in digital innovation and the potential for regulatory and legal barriers to reshape how large tech firms operate within Europe. While Meta aims to defend its data and AI ambitions, NOYB stands firm in demanding that privacy rights be fully respected, embodying the broader European effort to ensure tech compliance with GDPR standards.
