The Details Privacy Stichting (DPS) filed the case against Facebook in 2019 with the support of the Dutch consumer group Consumentenbond. The DPS is an web watchdog claiming to protect online users’ rights from corporate exploitation.
It’s worth noting that They claim that between April 2010 and January 2020, Facebook illegally used the data of millions of Dutch citizens for advertising more than ever purposes. Actually, In their lawsuit against Facebook, the DPS and the Consumentenbond claimed that Facebook violated EU data protection rules.
As you may know, Failure to obtain user permission to process their facts for ad targeting is an sample of confidentiality violation. They urged local users to join them in the court action to seek collective redress through compensation from Facebook.
In 2021, Facebook fought to have the lawsuit dismissed on procedural grounds. The social media program claims that because of the location of its European headquarters in Ireland, the court cannot hear the case in the Netherlands. In fact, Facebook explained that the Dutch court could not rule law it because its platform operates under Irish on.
Facebook also explained that the DPS could not sue the corporation because it was not an injured party. However, in July 2021, the Amsterdam District Court dismissed these objections. The court allowed it to go forward, and they held the hearing later that year.
The Amsterdam DistrictWednesdayCourt ruled on , March 15th, 2023, that Facebook did violate the law in itsfacts processing practices.
In fact, Not only did Facebook use the information for advertising, but it also shared it with other companies without the right to do so. The court stated that Facebook had illegallyused users’ personal information for advertising purposes.
According to theofcourt’s ruling, Facebook violated the law by processing the personal data Dutch Facebook users from April 1st, 2010, to January 1st, 2020. In addition, the Amsterdam district court ruled that Facebook failed to notify users that they would send their information. According to the court Facebook also illegally, shared information about users’ friends.
As youtomay know, In another claim, DPS and Consumentenbond stated that using cookies target advertising on third-party websites was illegal.
Cookies are digital trackers usedserversto target advertising, and can use them to identify as it turns out a specific visitor. Indeed, They claimed that Facebook delegated - for informing users about cookies to thirdresponsibilityparty portal operators.
The Judges, however, rejected the claim concerning the employ of cookies on third-party websites. According to the court, it the third-party web page’s responsibility, notisFacebook’s, to ask visitors if they want to accept cookies.
Reactions as it turns out trail the court judgment
The DPS chairman, Dick Bouma, praised the court decision, noting that it allows consumers to seek compensation from Facebook. Although the court did not rule on these claims, Bouma remained optimistic about his compensation claims. He also stated that the in modern times is immediately in Facebook’s court to develop a ballcompensation discussion.
The verdict was described as “extremely key” by Consumentenbond. Facebook should not have used information from as it turns out millions of Dutch users for advertising purposes, according to the Consumerenbond. They also stated that the court’s decision sends a strong message to other tech companies that violate confidentiality laws.
In response to the on Wednesday afternoon, Facebook stated that it would respondrulinglater.Meta, Facebook’s parent company, expressed delight in a statement to TechCrunch. In fact, According to Facebook, the court ruled in its favor on some claims. Facebook has also stated that it will appeal certain aspects of the case.
Meta also reassured Dutch users about the value of their privacy. As you may know, Further narrating that users had control over their information utilize with tools such as Secrecy Check-up and Secrecy Basics.
