{"id":27620,"date":"2023-01-04T16:41:48","date_gmt":"2023-01-04T16:41:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2023\/01\/04\/meta-fined-414m-for-using-personal-data-without-consent-the-register\/"},"modified":"2023-01-04T16:41:48","modified_gmt":"2023-01-04T16:41:48","slug":"meta-fined-414m-for-using-personal-data-without-consent-the-register","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2023\/01\/04\/meta-fined-414m-for-using-personal-data-without-consent-the-register\/","title":{"rendered":"Meta fined $414m for using personal data without consent \u2022 The Register"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n

A legal saga between Meta, Ireland and the European Union has reached a conclusion \u2013 at least for now \u2013 that forces the social media giant to remove data consent requirements from its terms of service in favor of explicit consent, and subjects it to a few hundred million more euros in fines for the trouble.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Irish Data Protection Commision (DPC) said today that it has made a final decision fining Meta’s Irish operating arm a combined \u20ac390 million ($414 million) for violations of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, and directing it to “bring its data processing operations into compliance within a period of 3 months,” the DPC said.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u20ac210m of the fine was imposed for violations stemming from Facebook, and \u20ac180m was imposed for Instagram violations. A third case involving Meta’s acquired OTT comms app, WhatsApp, is still pending a final outcome.<\/p>\n

Five years of fighting over, pending appeals<\/h3>\n

The DPC’s decision comes after the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) ruled in December<\/a> to overturn a previous decision from the DPC that allowed Meta to add data use consent into its terms of service, essentially bypassing the EU’s GDPR’s<\/a> requirement for explicit consent.<\/p>\n

In its statement discussing the decision, the DPC said<\/a> that it believed Meta wasn’t required to rely on consent, but that the EDPB took “a different view” that Meta wasn’t entitled to rely on contract obligations as a basis for allowing collection of personal data to serve ads. Instead, the EDPB said it wanted explicit opt-in and -out options in Meta’s apps.<\/p>\n

\n