Because the fine in Meta in three months could usher in a new era of the Internet

It is – or, at least, could be – disruptive, not only for Zuckerberg’s company but for the entire Internet as we know it, the impact of the decision taken by the Irish Data Protection Authority against Meta.

In fact, the Authority – requested by the Committee of European Data Protection Supervisors, contrary to its original opinion – has just contested Meta, among other things, that it cannot base the profiling for advertising purposes of its users on the contract with the latter concluded through the acceptance of the terms of use of the service and in addition to imposing a fine of 390 million euros, ordered it to adapt to the European legislation on the matter within the next three months.

Up to now, on the contrary, Meta – actually in the company of a large group of other large digital service providers – has considered that processing users’ personal data, also to offer them “targeted” advertising, represents an integral part of its service as requested by users.

The decision is the classic node that comes home to roost and it is a node that concerns the operating model of a large part of the Internet as we know it.

There he is.

When Meta claims that processing user data also to offer them advertising capable of intercepting their interests as best as possible is an activity necessary to allow it to execute the existing contract with the users themselves, it says so because it believes that the offer of personalized advertising is its obligation towards the users or, conversely, that being profiled to receive profiled advertising is the obligation assumed by users towards it?

Impossible to clearly answer the question by reading the current Facebook terms of service which, however, seem to suggest that according to Meta, the correct one is the first of the two solutions: users would be creditors of a service represented by being able to receive personalized advertising.

And, on the other hand, the position held by Facebook also seems to lead to the same conclusion during the dispute, all Italian, following the decision with which the Antitrust Authority of our house, in 2018, had contested that it could not promote its service as free as users paid for it in personal data, precisely those necessary to allow Facebook to sell personalized advertising to its investors.

On that occasion, Facebook’s defense, opposing this prospect, replied that: “It cannot be imagined as possible, as the judge of first instance erroneously intended to represent (ed. the Lazio TAR), for users to transfer their data to Facebook as ‘ consideration’ for the provision of the service nor that the transmission of personal data can pertain to an economically assessable activity, if not and at the most, to a mere profile of protection of some fundamental rights” because “The personal data of each individual is an asset extra commercesince they are fundamental rights of the person that cannot be sold, exchanged or, in any case, reduced to a mere economic interest”.

A position, actually, a bit hypocritical.

No user consciously, freely and spontaneously asks anyone – Big tech included – to receive profiled advertising but billions of users, however, with different levels of awareness but generally close to zero, accept daily to let themselves be x-rayed and to end up increasingly pervasive profiling algorithms for the sole purpose of using the Internet services we know without putting a hand in your wallet.

All in all, Meta, in the Irish affair, paid the price for this little big lie: who knows how the matter would have ended if in the contract between Meta and the users it had been written, clearly, very clearly and in bold type that the consideration that users undertake to pay to use the social network is represented by the delivery of millions of their personal data to the Zuckerberg company why would the latter extract ever more precise profiles to be used to convey the advertising of its investors and, therefore, guarantee its profits?

And what will happen tomorrow?

Meta and after Meta the other big techs will also come out and start telling users that if they want to use their services they have to accept a contract that clearly states that they have to pay in personal data, let themselves be known, profiled and classified?

And maybe offer their users an alternative as, after all, the major European publishers have been doing for some months by asking readers to choose whether to pay a subscription in cash or by agreeing to be profiled.

And if they did, would the processing of personal data be considered lawful?

But before that it would be democratically sustainable – and, if so, within what limits – that, especially a handful of global oligopolists, would ask billions of people to giving up a bit of one’s fundamental right such as privacy in exchange for the right to use a digital service?

These are questions that have now become inescapable with respect to which only those who think they have the right answer in their pocket are wrong.

And, on the other hand, if this weren’t the path that Meta will choose to follow – anticipating a choice that will progressively be everyone’s turn – what would be the alternative?

Asking users in a transparent way if they consent to being profiled knowing that even if they deny it, they will be able to continue using the same service?

And the internet that we know would be economically sustainable in these terms? Would it stand if billions of users denied consent to the processing of their personal data to ensure service providers continue to grind profits or, even more simply, if they revoked it after giving it?

Of course, consent is not the only alternative legal basis to the contract and, therefore – as, on the other hand, Meta itself, in a post on its official blog, anticipates its intention to do while announcing its intention to challenge the Irish decision – there are other hypotheses to be examined.

And, however, none – even assuming that there really exist other paths that can be legitimately pursued under European legislation – seems capable of guaranteeing the big techs the certain and stellar revenues collected so far.

From here to three months, in short, The internet as we know it may no longer exist.