noyb files GDPR complaint against Meta for “Pay or Okay”.
noyb filed a complaint against Meta with the Austrian data protection authority today. European users now have the “choice” to either consent to tracking for personalized advertising – or pay up to €251.88 per year to protect their fundamental right to data protection on Instagram and Facebook. Not only are the costs unacceptable, but industry figures suggest that only 3 percent of people want to be tracked – while more than 99 percent choose not to pay when faced with a “privacy fee.” If Meta gets away with this, competitors will soon follow in his footsteps. Assuming the average phone has 35 apps installed, personal use of your phone could soon cost around €8,815 per year.
Another attempt to circumvent EU data protection laws. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in July that Meta’s handling of user data for personalized ads was unlawful. But not only that: in January, the European Data Protection Board fined Meta €390 million for this breach and ordered the company to obtain user consent based on a Noyb complaint from 2018. In its next attempt, Undermining EU law, Meta now wants to charge people fees for choosing a privacy-friendly setting. Since the beginning of November, Instagram and Facebook users have had to decide whether they want to pay up to 251.88 euros per year or have their personal data monitored for targeted advertising.
“Freely given” consent at a high price? Under EU law, consent to online tracking and personalized advertising is only valid if it is “granted freely”. This is intended to ensure that users only give up their basic right to privacy if this is a matter of truly free will. Meta has now implemented the exact opposite of a truly free choice: Facebook alone will introduce a “data protection fee” of up to 12.99 euros per month if users do not agree to the processing of their personal data for targeted advertising. Each linked account (e.g. Instagram) costs an additional €8, so a person using Instagram and Facebook earns a total of €251.88 per year. For comparison, Meta reports that the average revenue per user in Europe was $16.79 between the third quarter of 2022 and the third quarter of 2023. This corresponds to an annual turnover of just €62.88 per user – and does not bear any relation to the monthly fee.
Felix Mikolasch, data protection lawyer at noyb: “EU law requires that consent is the user’s genuine free will. Contrary to this law, Meta charges a “data protection fee” of up to 250 euros per year if someone dares to exercise their fundamental right to data protection.”
3 to 10 percent want personalized advertising – but 99.9 percent agree. All available scientific research suggests that so-called “pay or okay” systems are the opposite of free consent and fundamentally impair the “free will” of users. The CEO of the “Pay or Okay” provider contentpass stated that 99.9 percent of visitors agreed to the tracking for a fee of 1.99 euros. At the same time, objective surveys suggest that only 3 to 10 percent of users want their personal data to be used for targeted advertising.
Max Schrems, chairman of noyb: “If 3 percent of people actually want to swim, but 99.9 percent end up in the water, every child knows that it was not a “free” decision. It’s neither smart nor legal – it’s just pathetic how Meta continues to ignore EU law.”
Data protection could soon cost 35,000 euros per family. If Meta manages to defend this new approach, it will likely trigger a domino effect. TikTok is reportedly already testing an ad-free subscription outside the US. Other app providers could follow in the near future and make online data protection unaffordable. According to Google, the average person has 35 apps installed on their smartphone. If all of these apps followed Meta’s example and charged a similar fee, people would have to pay a “fundamental rights fee” of €8,815.80 per year. For a family of four, the cost of data protection would rise to 35,263.20 euros per year – more than the average full-time income in the EU. Apparently, these figures become even more extreme in EU Member States with lower average incomes.
Max Schrems: “Basic rights are generally available to everyone. How many people would still exercise their right to vote if they had to pay 250 euros for it? There were times when basic rights were reserved for the rich. It seems that Meta wants to take us back for more than a hundred years.”
Privacy only for the rich. While this price is generally extremely high, it also completely ignores the very different income levels across EU countries – and the fact that 21.6% of the EU population is at risk of poverty or social exclusion. In this case, for example, the plaintiff is in financial distress and is receiving unemployment benefits. He simply can’t afford to pay another €250 a year when he’s already struggling with rent.
Max Schrems: “More than 20% of the EU population is already at risk of poverty. For the complainant in our case, as for many others, a pay or okay system would mean paying the rent or having privacy.”
The data protection authority should initiate an urgent procedure. Given the seriousness of the violations and the unusually high number of affected users, noyb is calling on the Austrian data protection authority to initiate urgent proceedings to stop the unlawful processing. In addition, noyb suggests that the authority impose a dissuasive fine to ensure that no other company starts copying Meta’s approach.