Human Rights defender Tanya O’Carroll has achieved a significant gain in the case of individual data confidentiality initiated in 2022 against Meta. As a result of the agreement with the social media giant Meta, the company will stop using O’Carroll’s personal data for targeted advertisements. This development is considered as an example of an individual objection based on the laws of British and European Union data protection against the unauthorized processing of users’ personal data for the first time.
O’Carroll drew attention to the right of users to object to direct marketing data processing activities in the British Data Protection Law during the trial process. According to this legal framework, when a user objected to the processing of marketing purposes, the data responsible has to stop this immediately. Meta rejected this approach and argued that the “personalized advertisements” it presented could not be considered within the scope of direct marketing.
The British Supreme Court, which will see the case, canceled the hearing due to Meta’s step back. O’Carroll, Techcrunch’a told, the case by the commodity that the request by the commodity, he said there was no choice but to go to an agreement. He said he would face serious legal expenses if he had continued the legal process and lost the case.
O’Carroll thinks that this development will be an example for other users who oppose advertising processing of personal data, beyond an individual gain. Although Meta does not accept legal responsibility in this case, the fact that O’Carroll will no longer work for advertising targeting means a significant change in practice.
The United Kingdom is currently implementing a parallel data protection structure to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union. Nevertheless, the effective implementation of these laws against companies that build advertising models such as Meta on a user data -based manner stands out as a very challenging process. Since the GDPR came into force in 2018, many complaints have been filed against the commodity and the company has faced millions of euros penalties. However, the direct intervention of the advertising model offered by the company without consent has been limited to date.
O’Carroll said in the case that the United Kingdom Information Commissioner (ICO) supports him and that it strengthens the process. ICO’s open position in favor of the plaintiff increases the likelihood of the institution to be involved if Meta continues to process user data. This can enable other users to encourage other users in their search for similar rights.
Although this case is limited to the agreement with only one user, the company seems to be possible in the UK in the UK. In this model, users have to make a choice between accepting advertising tracking or taking advantage of an advertising experience by paying a fee. O’Carroll said that this model is exempted from this model, and that it will access meta services free of charge. However, he refrained from giving information about the technical details of this access.
The fact that Meta has stepped back on an individual basis with this agreement does not mean that the company has changed its general data processing approach. Nevertheless, this individual gain, which is obtained as a result of the case, reveals that users can take a clearer stance against the data collection habits of technology giants using their legal rights. The increasing involvement of regulatory institutions in Europe and the UK may also bring more comprehensive regulations and potential model changes in the coming period.