The question of the use of personal data for targeted advertising is at the heart of a legal debate in Europe in particular with the emblematic case of Max Schrems v. Meta. This activist challenged Meta’s use of information linked to sexual orientation for advertising purposes, a practice now called into question by the European Court of Justice.
#CJUEAn online social network such as @Facebook cannot use all #PersonalData obtained for targeted advertising purposes, without time limitation and without distinction as to their nature 👉 https://t.co/VGsRk63Zfn
– Court of Justice EU (@CourUEPresse) October 4, 2024
What impact will this decision have on the online advertising sector? How will Meta and other digital giants adapt to these new rules? Find out what’s at stake and the potential repercussions of this historic verdict in the rest of this captivating article!
Max Schrems’ battle against Meta
Since 2014, Max Schrems, recognized privacy activist launched a legal battle against Meta. He noticed ads on Meta’s platforms that appeared to target his sexual orientation, prompting him to challenge the use of his personal data. Schrems claimed that Meta allowed advertisers to infer his sexual orientation from his app connections or website visits.
Meta, for its part, denied using data external to Facebook to personalize ads and has always claimed to exclude sensitive data from its advertising operations. However, the case took a significant turn when the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that sexual orientation could not be used for advertising purposes even if it is expressed publicly.
Can the CJEU really change things?
The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) marks a major turning point in personal data protection. It prohibits the use of sexual orientation in advertising, even if it is expressed publicly, the CJEU requires Meta to review its practices. This decision underlines the importance of complying with the GDPR and establishes clear rules for its application.
Max Schrems welcomed the decision, saying speaking publicly about one’s sexual identity does not mean consenting to the exploitation of this data. He hopes that this ruling will encourage other companies to respect confidentiality standards.
First Statement on today’s win against @MetaNewsroom / @facebook before the CJEU: https://t.co/qRrcolzYWL
– Max Schrems 🇪🇺 (@maxschrems) October 4, 2024
A major impact on the advertising industry
This decision adds to the many legal challenges facing Meta, including those initiated by Max Schrems and his organization NOYB. Since its 2015 victory against a transatlantic data transfer system, Schrems has consistently challenged Meta’s practices practices, pointing out loopholes in the protection of personal data.
In response, Meta awaits full publication of the judgment and reaffirms its commitment to privacy. The company claims to have invested heavily in building privacy protection into its products, while offering users tools to manage their information.
