Meta Faces Legal Challenges Over AI Training with EU User Data

Meta is making users who opted out of AI training opt out again, watchdog says

Privacy watchdog Noyb sent a cease-and-desist letter to Meta Wednesday, threatening to pursue a potentially billion-dollar class action to block Meta's AI training, which starts soon in the European Union. In the letter, Noyb noted that Meta only recently notified EU users on its platforms that they had until May 27 to opt their public posts out of Meta's AI training data sets. According to Noyb, Meta is also requiring users who already opted out of AI training in 2024 to opt out again or forever lose their opportunity to keep their data out of Meta's models, as training data likely cannot be easily deleted. That's a seeming violation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Noyb alleged. "Meta informed data subjects that, despite that fact that an objection to AI training under Article 21(2) GDPR was accepted in 2024, their personal data will be processed unless they object again -- against its former promises, which further undermines any legitimate trust in Meta's organizational ability to properly execute the necessary steps when data subjects exercise their rights," Noyb's letter said. This alleged lack of clarity for users who opt out makes it harder to trust that users can ever truly opt out, Noyb suggested. Previously, Meta "argued (in respect to EU-US data transfers) that a social network is a single system that does not allow to differentiate between EU and non-EU users, as many nodes (e.g. an item linked to an EU and a non-EU user) are shared," Noyb noted. That admission introduces "serious doubts that Meta can indeed technically implement a clean and proper differentiation between users that performed an opt-out and users that did not," Noyb alleged. "This lack of proper differentiation would mean that messages between a user who objected to the use of their data for AI training and a user who did not object could end up in Meta's AI systems despite the first user's objection," Noyb warned. The letter accused Meta of further deceptions, like planning to seize data that users may not consider "public," like disappearing stories typically only viewed by small audiences. That, Noyb said, differs significantly from AI crawlers scraping information posted on a public website. According to Noyb, there would be no issue with Meta's AI training in the EU if Meta would use a consent-based model rather than requiring rushed opt-outs. As Meta explained in a blog following a threatened preliminary injunction on AI training in Germany, the company plans to collect AI training data using a "legitimate interest" legal basis, which supposedly "follows the clear guidelines of the European Data Protection Committee of December 2024, which reflect the consensus between EU data protection authorities." But Noyb Chairman Max Schrems doesn't believe that Meta has a legitimate interest in sweeping data collection for AI training. "The European Court of Justice has already held that Meta cannot claim a 'legitimate interest' in targeting users with advertising," Schrems said in a press release. "How should it have a 'legitimate interest' to suck up all data for AI training? While the 'legitimate interest' assessment is always a multi-factor test, all factors seem to point in the wrong direction for Meta. Meta simply says that its interest in making money is more important than the rights of its users." Meta defends AI training In a statement, Meta's spokesperson defended the opt-out approach, noting that "we've provided EU users with a clear way to object to their data being used for training AI at Meta, notifying them via email and in-app notifications that they can object at any time." The spokesperson criticized "Noyb's copycat actions" as "part of an attempt by a vocal minority of activist groups to delay AI innovation in the EU, which is ultimately harming consumers and businesses who could benefit from these cutting-edge technologies." Noyb has requested a response from Meta by May 21, but it seems unlikely that Meta will quickly cave in this fight. In a blog post, Meta said that AI training on EU users was critical to building AI tools for Europeans that are informed by "everything from dialects and colloquialisms, to hyper-local knowledge and the distinct ways different countries use humor and sarcasm on our products." Meta argued that its AI training efforts in the EU are far more transparent than efforts from competitors Google and OpenAI, which, Meta noted, "have already used data from European users to train their AI models," supposedly without taking the steps Meta has to inform users. Also echoing a common refrain in the AI industry, another Meta blog warned that efforts to further delay Meta's AI training in the EU could lead to "major setbacks," pushing the EU behind rivals in the AI race. "Without a reform and simplification of the European regulatory system, Europe threatens to fall further and further behind in the global AI race and lose ground compared to the USA and China," Meta warned. Noyb discredits this argument and noted that it can pursue injunctions in various jurisdictions to block Meta's plan. The group said it's currently evaluating options to seek injunctive relief and potentially even pursue a class action worth possibly "billions in damages" to ensure that 400 million monthly active EU users' data rights are shielded from Meta's perceived grab. A Meta spokesperson reiterated to Ars that the company's plan "follows extensive and ongoing engagement with the Irish Data Protection Commission," while reiterating Meta's statements in blogs that its AI training approach "reflects consensus among" EU Data Protection Authorities (DPAs). But while Meta claims that EU regulators have greenlit its AI training plans, Noyb argues that national DPAs have "largely stayed silent on the legality of AI training without consent," and Meta seems to have "simply moved ahead anyways." "This fight is essentially about whether to ask people for consent or simply take their data without it," Schrems said, adding, "Meta's absurd claims that stealing everyone's personal data is necessary for AI training is laughable. Other AI providers do not use social network data -- and generate even better models than Meta."

noyb sends Meta C&D demanding no EU user data AI training

'Legitimate interest' won't wash, says privacy outfit, as Zuck's org claims activists want to 'delay AI innovation' There's a Max Schrems-shaped object standing in the way of Meta's plans to train its AI on the data of its European users, and he's come armed with several justifications for why Zuckercorp might be violating EU regulations with its stated plans. Noyb contends that it's 'absurd' for Meta to argue it needs the personal data of every single user's post and comments from the past 20 years to adequately train its AIt The German lawyer's noyb (None Of Your Business) privacy advocacy group sent a cease and desist letter to Meta Wednesday. Noyb's letter tells the Facebook giant that, if it opts not to discuss the matter or agree to make user data for AI data training an explicit opt-in, as opposed to the opt-out approach Meta is currently pursuing, Schrems and company are ready to file an injunction, or even take the matter to court in a class-action case. This isn't the first time noyb has challenged Meta on plans to train its AI on the public posts and comments of EU users, as we noted in our coverage last month when Meta announced plans to resume training its AI in the EU. In that instance, settled in June 2024, Meta agreed to pause EU/EEA AI training following 11 complaints from noyb to the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC). The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) said in a December opinion requested by the DPC that there were appropriate ways to train AI on EU/EEA citizen social media data, but noyb's letter sent to Meta today makes clear it doesn't believe the company's latest attempt to reintroduce training collection complies with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The legal eagles' letter [PDF] to Meta argues the company's continued reliance on GDPR's "legitimate interest" exception to collecting data without explicit opt-in consent as allowed by Article 6(1) of the data protection law is incorrect, adding that it believes Meta has no legitimate interest which overrides the legislation's requirement that users need to explicitly opt in to give their consent. To support its case, noyb argues Meta has already been told something similar with regards to collecting the data of its users to serve advertisements, which it previously did without an explicit opt-in on the same "legitimate interest" grounds. Meta agreed in 2023 to drop legitimate interest in favor of explicit consent for advertising following years of GDPR lawsuits. Noyb believes this is the exact same situation, only swapping ad targeting out for AI training. "The European Court of Justice has already held that Meta cannot claim a 'legitimate interest' in targeting users with advertising," Schrems said in a noyb statement. "How should it have a 'legitimate interest' to suck up all data for AI training?" Meta has previously argued it needs to collect social media data for AI training in order to make its AI models culturally aware. Were Meta to make AI training data collection an opt-in feature and get just 10 percent of its 400 million monthly active users in the EU to consent, noyb countered, "such training would already clearly be sufficient to learn EU languages and alike." Noyb contends it is "absurd" for Meta to argue it needs the personal data of every single user's post and comments from the past 20 years to adequately train its AI. "Most other AI providers (like OpenAI or French Mistral) have zero access to social media data and still outcompete Meta's AI systems," noyb said, being sure to get a burn in with its reasoning. Meta contends otherwise, naturally. A company spokesperson told The Register it believes its approach clearly complies with EDPB guidance. "Noyb's copycat actions are part of an attempt by a vocal minority of activist groups to delay AI innovation in the EU, which is ultimately harming consumers and businesses who could benefit from these cutting-edge technologies," Meta told us. The company further reads the December opinion from the EDPB completely differently from noyb, arguing the document validated its use of legitimate interest to harvest the data without an explicit opt-in. Meta further claimed it's not the only AI company using legitimate interest to process EU citizens' data for AI training, and declared its method to be more transparent than its competitors. Given Meta's response, it seems likely this matter will end up in court. "We are currently evaluating our options to file injunctions, but there is also the option for a subsequent class action for non-material damages," Schrems noted. Noyb estimates that, were it to file a class-action redress lawsuit, Meta could be on the hook for more than €200 billion ($224B), assuming €500 in non-material damages per each EU monthly active user. Additionally, noyb said other ground in the EU are also reviewing their options for litigation to stop Meta's AI data collection, and expects individual European citizens will likely take action as well. "We are very surprised that Meta would take this risk just to avoid asking users for their consent," Schrems said. "Even just managing this litigation will be a huge task for Meta." ®

Advocacy group threatens Meta with injunction over use of EU data for AI training

BRUSSELS, May 14 (Reuters) - Austrian advocacy group NOYB said on Wednesday it would seek an injunction against Meta Platforms (META.O), opens new tab that could lead to billion-euro damages claims if the tech giant goes ahead with plans to use Europeans' personal data to train its artificial intelligence models. NOYB (none of your business), led by privacy activist Max Schrems, said it had sent a cease and desist letter on Wednesday to Meta which plans to start using personal data from European users of Instagram and Facebook from May 27. Meta has cited a legitimate interest under EU privacy rules for using users' data to train and develop its generative AI models and other AI tools, which can be shared with third parties. The U.S. tech giant said last month that users would receive a link to a form where they can object to their data being used for training purposes and that private messages and public data from accounts of users under the age of 18 will not be used in the training. Schrems criticised Meta's rationale. "The European Court of Justice has already held that Meta cannot claim a 'legitimate interest' in targeting users with advertising. How should it have a 'legitimate interest' to suck up all data for AI training?" he said in a statement. "We are currently evaluating our options to file injunctions, but there is also the option for a subsequent class action for non-material damages. If you think about the more than 400 million European Meta users who could all demand damages of just 500 euros or so, you can do the math," Schrems said. NOYB said an injunction could be filed under the EU Collective Redress which enables consumers to pursue collective lawsuits against companies in the bloc. It set a May 21 deadline for Meta to respond. NOYB, which last year called on EU privacy enforcers to act, said Meta could give users an option to opt-in rather than opt-out and also provide clear conditions for AI training such as using anonymised user data, in line with EU privacy rules. Reporting by Foo Yun Chee; Editing by Susan Fenton Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab Suggested Topics:Boards, Policy & RegulationRegulatory Oversight Foo Yun Chee Thomson Reuters An agenda-setting and market-moving journalist, Foo Yun Chee is a 21-year veteran at Reuters. Her stories on high profile mergers have pushed up the European telecoms index, lifted companies' shares and helped investors decide on their next move. Her knowledge and experience of European antitrust laws and developments helped her break stories on Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta and Apple, numerous market-moving mergers and antitrust investigations. She has previously reported on Greek politics and companies, when Greece's entry into the eurozone meant it punched above its weight on the international stage, as well as on Dutch corporate giants and the quirks of Dutch society and culture that never fail to charm readers.

Meta to Train AI on E.U. User Data From May 27 Without Consent; Noyb Threatens Lawsuit

Austrian privacy non-profit noyb (none of your business) has sent Meta's Irish headquarters a cease-and-desist letter, threatening the company with a class action lawsuit if it proceeds with its plans to train users' data for training its artificial intelligence (AI) models without an explicit opt-in. The move comes weeks after the social media behemoth announced its plans to train its AI models using public data shared by adults across Facebook and Instagram in the European Union (E.U.) starting May 27, 2025, after it paused the efforts in June 2024 following concerns raised by Irish data protection authorities. "Instead of asking consumers for opt-in consent, Meta relies on an alleged 'legitimate interest' to just suck up all user data," noyb said in a statement. "Meta may face massive legal risks - just because it relies on an 'opt-out' instead of an 'opt-in' system for AI training." The advocacy group further noted that Meta AI is not compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the region, and that, besides claiming that it has a "legitimate interest" in taking user data for AI training, the company is also limiting the right to opt-out before the training has started. Noyb also pointed out that even if 10% of Meta's users expressly agree to hand over the data for this purpose, it would amount to enough data points for the company to learn E.U. languages. It's worth pointing out that Meta previously claimed that it needed to collect this information to capture the diverse languages, geography, and cultural references of the region. "Meta starts a huge fight just to have an opt-out system instead of an opt-in system," noyb's Max Schrems said. "Instead, they rely on an alleged 'legitimate interest' to just take the data and run with it. This is neither legal nor necessary." "Meta's absurd claims that stealing everyone's personal data is necessary for AI training is laughable. Other AI providers do not use social network data - and generate even better models than Meta." The privacy group also accused the company of moving ahead with its plans by putting the onus on users and pointed out that national data protection authorities have largely stayed silent on the legality of AI training without consent. "It therefore seems that Meta simply moved ahead anyways - taking another huge legal risk in the E.U. and trampling over users' rights," noyb added. In a statement shared with Reuters, Meta has rejected noyb's arguments, stating they are wrong on the facts and the law, and that it has provided E.U. users with a "clear" option to object to their data being processed for AI training. This is not the first time Meta's reliance on GDPR's "legitimate interest" to collect data without explicit opt-in consent has come under scrutiny. In August 2023, the company agreed to change the legal basis from "legitimate interest" to a consent-based approach to process user data for serving targeted ads for people in the region. The disclosure comes as the Belgian Court of Appeal ruled the Transparency and Consent Framework, used by Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and other companies to obtain consent for data processing for personalized advertising purposes, is illegal across Europe, citing violation of several principles of GDPR laws.

"Meta AI non-compliant with GDPR" - Digital rights group menaces Meta with injunction over EU AI training

Unlike what Meta claims, noyb argues Meta AI training isn't compliant with GDPR and threatens to file an injunction as a potential next step Austria-based digital rights group noyb is threatening Meta with an injunction over its AI training plans in the EU, arguing these aren't compliant with data privacy laws. The big tech giant is set to feed its Meta AI models with all public posts and users' interactions starting from May 27, 2025, as an opt-out option. This means that European Facebook and Instagram account holders must fill out an objection form before this date if they don't wish any of their data to be used. Yet, noyb argues Meta should ask for opt-in consent instead, as per GDPR rules. The group led by privacy activist Max Schrems has already filed a cease and desist letter against Meta on Wednesday, May 14, asking the company to halt its current plans. An injunction and potential class actions could be the next steps if Meta AI training goes ahead as it stands, said Schrems - something that could lead to substantial damage claims from affected users. According to noyb, the legal conundrum around Meta AI lies in how the social media giant plans to use the legitimate interest provision ruled by Article 6(1)(f) of GDPR, which allows companies to collect and process users' data without freely given users' consent. Examples of legitimate interest include using people's data to prevent fraudulent activities, processing client data for customer service purposes, or managing employee relationships. "The European Court of Justice has already held that Meta cannot claim a 'legitimate interest' in targeting users with advertising. How should it have a 'legitimate interest' to suck up all data for AI training?" said Scherms, arguing that in Meta AI case legitimate interest is "neither legal nor necessary." Furthermore, companies are also required to conduct a multi-factor legitimate interest assessment to determine if using this provision does not negatively impact on individual's rights and freedoms. Noyb, however, argues that Meta AI training won't be able to comply with other GDPR rights, such as the right to be forgotten or the right to access their data afterwards. That's because, once in an LLM database, it's very hard (if not impossible) to retrieve the data. Commenting on this, Schrems said: "Meta simply says that its interest in making money is more important than the rights of its users." Meta announced its intention to resume Meta AI training in the EU on April 14, 2025. The company had to pause its launch in 2024 amid growing concerns among EU data consumer protection and regulators. Noyb was among those filing privacy complaints to stop Meta from training its AI models with Europeans' data back in June last year. In an official announcement, Facebook and Instagram's parent company ensures it has engaged with EU regulators and its approach complies with European laws. Specifically, the company refers to an opinion issued by the EDPB in December, which provides a guide to help the Irish Data Protection Authority (DPA) assess the use of legitimate interest as a legal basis for AI models. Yet, according to Schrems, this isn't enough to make Meta AI training legally sound. He said: "As far as we have heard, Meta has 'engaged' with the authorities, but this hasn't led to any 'green light'. It seems that Meta is simply moving ahead and ignoring EU Data Protection Authorities." So far, only a German consumer protection group, the North Rhine-Westphalia Consumer Advice Center (VZNRW), has questioned Meta AI's legality and issued an official request to Meta to halt its AI training plans in the EU. As noyb notes, national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) have largely remained silent, despite calling on citizens to urgently opt out of Meta AI training. On its side, Meta has dismissed the VZNRW's accusations and warned that an injunction against Meta's AI training would hurt both the German and EU AI market. As mentioned, Meta is set to start feeding its AI models with all EU Facebook and Instagram account holders' posts and interactions starting from May 27. While noyb said to be currently evaluating their option to file an injunction or a class action if Meta goes through with its plan, the group keeps arguing that asking for user consent is the simplest solution to fix GDPR issues around Meta AI training. In the meantime, though, it's crucial that Meta users in the EU opt out if they don't want the company to start using their data for AI training. That's because, as privacy firm Proton, the provider behind one of the best VPN and encrypted email apps, pointed out in a LinkedIn post: "It's hard to predict what this data might be used for in the future - better to be safe than sorry."

Advocacy group threatens Meta with injunction over use of EU data for AI training

NOYB (none of your business), led by privacy activist Max Schrems, said it had sent a cease and desist letter on Wednesday to Meta which plans to start using personal data from European users of Instagram and Facebook from May 27.Austrian advocacy group NOYB said on Wednesday it would seek an injunction against Meta Platforms that could lead to billion-euro damages claims if the tech giant goes ahead with plans to use Europeans' personal data to train its artificial intelligence models. NOYB (none of your business), led by privacy activist Max Schrems, said it had sent a cease and desist letter on Wednesday to Meta which plans to start using personal data from European users of Instagram and Facebook from May 27. Meta has cited a legitimate interest under EU privacy rules for using users' data to train and develop its generative AI models and other AI tools, which can be shared with third parties. The U.S. tech giant said last month that users would receive a link to a form where they can object to their data being used for training purposes and that private messages and public data from accounts of users under the age of 18 will not be used in the training. Schrems criticised Meta's rationale. "The European Court of Justice has already held that Meta cannot claim a 'legitimate interest' in targeting users with advertising. How should it have a 'legitimate interest' to suck up all data for AI training?" he said in a statement. "We are currently evaluating our options to file injunctions, but there is also the option for a subsequent class action for non-material damages. If you think about the more than 400 million European Meta users who could all demand damages of just 500 euros or so, you can do the math," Schrems said. NOYB said an injunction could be filed under the EU Collective Redress which enables consumers to pursue collective lawsuits against companies in the bloc. It set a May 21 deadline for Meta to respond. NOYB, which last year called on EU privacy enforcers to act, said Meta could give users an option to opt-in rather than opt-out and also provide clear conditions for AI training such as using anonymised user data, in line with EU privacy rules.

Meta faces row over plan to use European data for AI

A Vienna-based privacy campaign group said Wednesday it has sent a cease-and-desist letter to Meta, after the tech giant announced plans to train its artificial intelligence models with European users' personal data. When Meta AI first launched in the European Union in late March, the tech giant was at pains to point out that the chatbot was not trained on data from European users.A Vienna-based privacy campaign group said Wednesday it has sent a cease-and-desist letter to Meta, after the tech giant announced plans to train its artificial intelligence models with European users' personal data. The move comes after Meta said last month it would push ahead with plans to use personal data from European users of its Instagram and Facebook platforms for AI technology training from May 27, despite criticism over its legality. Meta has been hit with multiple privacy complaints in Europe, but cited a "legitimate interest" to process personal data for AI training. The privacy group, the European Center for Digital Rights -- also known as Noyb ("None of Your Business") -- threatened to file an injunction or class-action lawsuit against Meta if it does not halt plans. "Meta's absurd claims that stealing everyone's (personal) data is necessary for AI training is laughable," Noyb founder Max Schrems said in a statement. "Other AI providers do not use social network data -- and generate even better models than Meta," he added. When Meta AI first launched in the European Union in late March, the tech giant was at pains to point out that the chatbot was not trained on data from European users. Its rollout on the continent was delayed by more than a year as a result of overlapping European regulations on emerging technologies, including user data, AI and digital markets. Following the complaints, Meta temporarily put its AI plans on hold in June 2024, before recently announcing it would go ahead with them. "It is... totally absurd to argue that Meta needs the personal data of everyone that uses Facebook or Instagram in the past 20 years to train AI," Schrems said, adding the plans were "neither legal nor necessary". "Meta simply says that (its) interest in making money is more important than the rights of its users," he said, adding that users could simply be asked for their consent. With about 400 million estimated Meta users in Europe, the approval of 10 percent of them would "already clearly be sufficient" for AI language training and the like, Schrems said. Launched in 2018, Noyb has taken several court proceedings against technology giants, often prompting action from regulatory authorities.

Austrian Group Questions Meta's 'Legitimate Interest' In Using EU Data For AI, Threatens Legal Action Over $200 Billion: '...Making Money Is More Important Than The Rights Of Its Users' - Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOG), Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Austrian advocacy group, NOYB, is gearing up to seek an injunction against Meta Platforms META, potentially leading to billion-euro damages claims. This action comes as a response to Meta's plans to use Europeans' personal data for AI training. What Happened: NOYB, the group spearheaded by privacy activist Max Schrems, issued a "cease and desist" letter to Meta on Wednesday. Meta intends to start using personal data from European Instagram and Facebook users from May 27. The company has defended its actions under EU privacy rules, claiming a legitimate interest in using user data to train its AI models and other tools, which may also be shared with third parties. Last month, the Mark Zuckerberg-led company announced that users can object to their data being used for training via a provided form and assured that private messages and data from users under 18 will be excluded from training. Schrems criticized Meta's rationale, questioning the company's 'legitimate interest' in using user data for AI training. He suggested potential injunctions and a class action for non-material damages, noting that if 400 million European Meta users each claimed €500, the total could reach €200 billion ($224.62 billions). "While the 'legitimate interest' assessment is always a multi-factor test, all factors seem to point in the wrong direction for Meta. Meta simply says that it's interest in making money is more important than the rights of its users," said Schrems. NOYB has given Meta a May 21 deadline to respond, proposing user opt-in options and clearer AI training terms to comply with EU privacy regulations. SEE ALSO: Dogecoin, Shiba Inu Surge Over 25% In 7 Days: What Is Going On? - Benzinga Get StartedStart Futures Trading Fast -- with a $200 Bonus Join Plus500 today and get up to $200 to start trading real futures. Practice with free paper trading, then jump into live markets with lightning-fast execution, low commissions, and full regulatory protection. Get Started Why It Matters: This development follows a series of events that have put Meta under scrutiny. In February, Meta and Alphabet GOOG GOOGL criticized Europe's stringent AI regulations, arguing that these rules were hampering the growth of the region's tech industry. In April, Meta and Apple AAPL were fined nearly $800 million for violating the European Union's Digital Markets Act. Meta was also found to be profiting from its Llama AI models through revenue-sharing agreements with host businesses and facing lawsuits regarding the same. While other tech giants like Microsoft MSFT have committed to adhering to European laws, Meta's stance has been met with criticism and potential legal action. Meta holds a momentum rating of 87.81% and a growth rating of 75.91%, according to Benzinga's Proprietary Edge Rankings. The Benzinga Growth metric evaluates a stock's historical earnings and revenue expansion across multiple timeframes, prioritizing both long-term trends and recent performance. Meta stock surged more than 39% over the past year. READ MORE: Bernie Sanders Says 'American Workers Are Angry' Because Wages Haven't Kept Up -- 'They Are Lower Today Than They Were 52 Years Ago' Image via Shutterstock Disclaimer: This content was partially produced with the help of AI tools and was reviewed and published by Benzinga editors. AAPLApple Inc$212.17-0.36%Stock Score Locked: Want to See it? Benzinga Rankings give you vital metrics on any stock - anytime. Reveal Full ScoreEdge RankingsMomentum63.28Growth45.87Quality74.95Value8.05Price TrendShortMediumLongOverviewGOOGAlphabet Inc$161.340.28%GOOGLAlphabet Inc$160.030.31%METAMeta Platforms Inc$661.800.88%MSFTMicrosoft Corp$446.30-0.63%Got Questions? AskWhich tech companies could face similar lawsuits?How will Meta's legal challenges impact its stock?What opportunities exist in privacy tech due to this event?Which AI startups might benefit from Meta's struggles?How might European regulations affect other tech firms?Could this lead to a surge in user data protection services?What impact will this have on Meta's partnerships?Is there potential in alternative social media platforms now?Which law firms might gain from Meta's legal issues?How could this affect advertising revenues for Meta?Powered ByMarket News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

Meta Faces EU Cease and Desist Over AI Training on User Data

Meta is facing a cease and desist from the advocacy group None of Your Business (NOYB) in the European Union for relying on user data to train its AI models. This comes after Meta announced in April this year that it would start training its models on public content from its platforms -- such as public posts, comments, and people's interactions with Meta AI. NOYB explains that Meta is using an opt-out approach for processing personal data -- in which users automatically agree to let the company process their data. To implement such an approach in the EU, companies must show that they have a legitimate interest in their data processing activities. For instance, a bank may install CCTV cameras to prevent theft because it has a legitimate interest in keeping money stored at its locations safe. Meta has argued that it has the same legitimate interest for processing user data through the opt-out approach. However, NOYB says this justification is not applicable in this situation. It cites a previous case where the Chief Justice of the European Union held that Meta cannot rely on legitimate interest for personalized advertising within a platform, as users do not have a reasonable expectation that their data will be used for such a purpose. "The European Court of Justice has already held that Meta cannot claim a 'legitimate interest' in targeting users with advertising. How should it have a 'legitimate interest' to suck up all data for AI training? While the 'legitimate interest' assessment is always a multi-factor test, all factors seem to point in the wrong direction for Meta," NYOB founder Max Schrems says in the press release discussing Meta's move. This isn't the first time that NOYB has pushed back against Meta's attempts to train its models on people's data in the EU. In June last year, the advocacy group filed complaints against Meta in 11 countries in response to its plans to train models on user data using an opt-out approach. Soon after, Meta delayed plans to train models on EU users data following a request from the Irish Data Protection Commission. The company directly addressed the fact that it had relied on the legitimate interest defence for model training, stating that other industry players had also used the same. Further, Meta mentioned that its opt-out approach was easier than those of other AI companies already training models on EU user data. In July, the company said it would not release its multi-modal Llama model in the EU, citing the region's unpredictable regulatory environment as the reason behind its decision. NOYB argues that Meta's opt-out approach will likely prevent compliance with GDPR rights such as the right to be forgotten, the right to rectify incorrect data, and the right to access one's data in an AI system. It further adds that Meta provides its models as open source, which means it will not be in a position to recall or update a model once it is published. NOYB says that while Meta claims compliance with GDPR would make AI training in the EU impossible, all it needs to do is switch to an opt-in approach. If the company provides users with clear conditions for model training, many users are likely to give consent. Even if only a small percentage of users opt in, Meta's massive user base means that consent from just 10% would still allow its models to learn EU languages and regional information. "Meta's absurd claims that stealing everyone's personal data is necessary for AI training are laughable. Other AI providers do not use social network data -- and generate even better models than Meta," Schrems said, seemingly in response to Meta's claim that other AI players also rely on opt-out approaches. NOYB mentions that many data protection authorities have informed Meta that it should urgently opt out of AI training. Meta itself has said that it is engaging with EU regulators on using social media data for training. However, according to NOYB, data protection authorities have largely remained silent on the legality of such training without consent. This creates uncertainty about the regulatory stance. "We are currently evaluating our options to file injunctions, but there is also the option for a subsequent class action for non-material damages," Schrems said, explaining how the group plans to proceed with its cease and desist letter. In India, Meta updated its policies in December 2023 to indicate that it would use public data for model training. Unlike their EU counterparts, Indian users do not have the right to opt out of data processing. Under India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, companies can use publicly available personal data without consent or adherence to the act's other provisions. However, Indian users can request that companies stop using their personal data shared with third parties. The company does not automatically accept these requests, but rather reviews them based on local laws. AI companies must seek user permission to process non-publicly available personal data. Furthermore, draft rules released earlier this year to operationalize the act state that social media companies will have to delete the personal data of inactive individuals after three years.