According to engadget, Meta has been ordered to pay €479 million ($552 million) to 87 Spanish media outlets by a Madrid court. The penalty stems from the company changing its legal justification for collecting user data after GDPR took effect in 2018. Instead of relying on user consent, Meta switched to claiming data collection was “necessary for the performance of a contract.” The court found this violated both GDPR and Spanish antitrust law, giving Meta an unfair competitive advantage in online advertising. The fine represents a percentage of Meta’s ad revenue over the five years it used this unlawful approach. Meta has contested the penalty and says it will appeal the decision.
Meta’s recurring data dilemma
Here’s the thing: this isn’t Meta’s first rodeo with European data regulators. We’ve seen this pattern before – the company pushes the boundaries of data collection, gets called out, and then fights the ruling. What’s interesting here is the specific legal maneuver they tried. Switching from consent to “contract necessity” as the legal basis for data processing? That’s a pretty bold move, and regulators saw right through it.
Basically, Meta argued they needed all that personal data to provide their services. But the court wasn’t buying it. They determined this gave Meta an “unfair competitive advantage” that Spanish media couldn’t match. And when you’re talking about five years of advertising revenue, that advantage becomes massive.
The bigger picture for digital advertising
So what does this mean for the future? We’re likely to see more of these “unfair advantage” arguments in antitrust cases, especially around data. When one company can collect and leverage user data in ways others can’t, that creates market distortions. The Spanish court basically said Meta’s data practices weren’t just illegal – they were anti-competitive.
And here’s where it gets tricky for tech companies operating in Europe. They’re caught between GDPR’s strict consent requirements and the reality that their business models depend on data. Meta eventually reverted to user consent in 2023, but the damage was already done. The five-year period where they used the questionable legal basis is what got them in trouble.
What happens now?
Meta’s appeal means this could drag on for years. But the immediate impact is clear: European regulators are getting more aggressive about connecting data privacy violations to competition law. This isn’t just about fines anymore – it’s about market fairness.
Look, when a court calculates damages based on years of advertising revenue, that sends a powerful message. Other tech companies are definitely paying attention. Will this change how they approach data collection in Europe? Probably. But the fundamental tension between privacy regulations and ad-supported business models isn’t going away anytime soon.
