German antitrust regulators have successfully concluded a landmark challenge against Meta’s “superprofiling” practices, forcing the tech giant to implement significant restrictions on how it aggregates user data. While the binding agreement currently applies specifically to Germany, officials note that several key measures—such as the Account Centre and Facebook Login adjustments—are already being rolled out across Europe.
“Intense discussions” behind the scenes
The German Federal Cartel Office (FCO) confirmed that these concessions were secured only after “intensive discussions” with Meta. Behind the diplomatic language, this signals a protracted struggle to force the company into compliance.
Last year, the FCO dismissed Meta’s initial proposals as “seriously deficient,” citing manipulative design choices that pressured users into making decisions against their own interests. The regulator argued that Meta’s lack of transparency prevented users from giving informed consent regarding their data.
While the watchdog is now more satisfied with the final set of concessions, it acknowledges that the broader fight against Meta’s data-hungry business model is far from over. FCO President Andreas Mundt noted that these tools provide users with greater control over how their personal data from third-party apps and websites links to their Facebook accounts.
The ongoing battle for privacy
Despite this victory, the regional conflict regarding Meta’s privacy-hostile model continues. Since November 2023, Meta has attempted to navigate EU regulations by forcing users to choose between consenting to ad tracking or paying a monthly subscription fee—a sharp pivot from the company’s original promise that “Facebook is free and always will be.”
This “pay or consent” model remains contentious, especially under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which mandates that consent must be “freely given” to be legally valid. Critics argue that forcing a payment for privacy does not constitute a free choice.
A shift in the legal landscape
The multi-year FCO case has fundamentally altered the legal landscape regarding surveillance-based advertising. A 2021 referral to the EU’s Court of Justice led to a 2023 ruling that significantly restricted Meta’s ability to use personal data for tracking ads. In response, Meta shifted its legal justification, moving from “legitimate interest” to a forced consent flow, which is now facing further scrutiny.
Currently, Meta’s business model is under fire from multiple fronts, including regional data protection authorities and the European Commission. The latter is investigating Meta under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a competition framework that draws heavily from the principles established during the FCO’s superprofiling case.
The legacy of the FCO case
The FCO highlights that Article 5(2) of the DMA now empowers the European Commission to take direct action against gatekeepers that combine data across services without valid user consent. Furthermore, consumer protection rules may soon be applied to how Meta designs its user interfaces to ensure they are not deceptive.
Ultimately, the most lasting legacy of the FCO’s challenge may be the change in the public and regulatory conversation. By framing privacy violations as an “exploitative abuse” of a monopoly position, the case has established that data harvesting is not just a privacy issue, but a critical threat to fair market competition.
