4 ms·

If there was any doubt EU privacy laws were of any use, here is some proof.

by nickserv 3y ago

dewey 3y ago
I doubt it's related to privacy at all, it's not different than the Instagram app which is available everywhere.
- troupo 3y ago
  People think it's mostly related to Digital Markets Act https://www.theverge.com/23789754/threads-meta-twitter-eu-dma-digital-markets https://www.theverge.com/23789754/threads-meta-twitter-eu-dm... --- start quote --- Mosseri attributed the postponement to a variety of issues. But he specifically noted rules preventing Meta from mixing the data it collects from users across products like Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. ... The DMA prevents companies as big as Meta from reusing a user’s personal data — including their name and location — across its products for targeted advertising without user consent. --- end quote ---
  - tough 3y ago
    What I read between those lines Meta: There's this small inconvenience for us, that if we decide to ignore the European market instead of fixing it goes away. They clearly are extorting the EU with their -now I won't work here- techniques. Good riddance if you ask me
    - em-bee 3y ago
      they knew this going in, so my guess is that they took a shortcut with pushing instragram users into threads in order to make it successful quickly. and now they are quietly working on cleaning up in order to enter the EU market later.
    - ahahahahah 3y ago
      I don't understand your point. Do you think that Meta should be obligated to provide their services everywhere? If I'm running a company, and the laws in Italy would require more work to comply with than the value I would receive from being in Italy, how could you somehow possibly fault me for deciding that the best thing for my company is to just not be available in Italy?
      - troupo 3y ago
        No. The point it: if you run your business in a country, you comply with the laws. Meta has been doing everything in their power to avoid doing that. See the most recent example: "CJEU declares Meta/Facebook's GDPR approach largely illegal" https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu-declares-metafacebooks-gdpr-approach-largely-illegal https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu-declares-metafacebooks-gdpr-approach...
- camillomiller 3y ago
  The fact that it transfers data from Instagram is already a gigantic headache for Meta. The sharing of data between Whatsapp and other Meta properties, for example, has been blocked multiple times due to EU privacy laws. Instagram being in the clear in Europe doesn’t automatically means that Threads is, and they clearly don’t wanna take any risk by enrolling EU Instagram users semi-automatically. Moreover, the connection between the Threads account and the Instagram account (i.e. you can’t eliminate a Threads account without eliminating your Instagram account) sounds like the main culprit here. And it’s good that it is. It’s basically a forced user retention pattern that is in place only to favor Meta. In other words, Threads is a can of privacy worms by EU standards. The US is still a privacy wild west and Meta actively lobbies for it to stay that way. Threads is great example of why that is.
thsksbd 3y ago
Or, Meta doesn't want to run afoul EU censorship laws that coming into force soon and EU folks are blocked until European Threads is even more spied and censored on.
- floomk 3y ago
  [dead]
- jdiff 3y ago
  This has little, if any, recognizable connection to facts in reality.
constantcrying 3y ago
But they are not accomplishing their goal. The intention is to force these companies not to collect data on EU citizens, not to stop companies from operating in the EU.
- AndrewDucker 3y ago
  The first will follow from the second. If you have a choice of two social networks to use, one which has your European friends/family on it and one that doesn't then you will be more likely to use the one that has them. This will then exert pressure on the company to do what is necessary to get those people onto its systems.
- nickserv 3y ago
  Well if they're not operating in the EU then they're not collecting EU user data ;-) On a more serious note, if this spurs other companies into developing products and services that align with EU privacy standards, then all the better. It's not like Meta/FB is a huge contributor to employment or the economy in the EU.
ahahahahah 3y ago
EU laws could actually require a company to identify EU-based users that are using VPN if they actually want to be compliant. Using VPN doesn't somehow make EU laws no longer apply to that user. Most companies just don't care to follow the law. We should be praising Meta for their commitment to the EU ideals here.

If there was any doubt EU privacy laws were of any use, here is some proof.

dewey 3y ago

I doubt it's related to privacy at all, it's not different than the Instagram app which is available everywhere.

troupo 3y ago
People think it's mostly related to Digital Markets Act https://www.theverge.com/23789754/threads-meta-twitter-eu-dma-digital-markets https://www.theverge.com/23789754/threads-meta-twitter-eu-dm... --- start quote --- Mosseri attributed the postponement to a variety of issues. But he specifically noted rules preventing Meta from mixing the data it collects from users across products like Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. ... The DMA prevents companies as big as Meta from reusing a user’s personal data — including their name and location — across its products for targeted advertising without user consent. --- end quote ---
- tough 3y ago
  What I read between those lines Meta: There's this small inconvenience for us, that if we decide to ignore the European market instead of fixing it goes away. They clearly are extorting the EU with their -now I won't work here- techniques. Good riddance if you ask me
  - em-bee 3y ago
    they knew this going in, so my guess is that they took a shortcut with pushing instragram users into threads in order to make it successful quickly. and now they are quietly working on cleaning up in order to enter the EU market later.
  - ahahahahah 3y ago
    I don't understand your point. Do you think that Meta should be obligated to provide their services everywhere? If I'm running a company, and the laws in Italy would require more work to comply with than the value I would receive from being in Italy, how could you somehow possibly fault me for deciding that the best thing for my company is to just not be available in Italy?
    - troupo 3y ago
      No. The point it: if you run your business in a country, you comply with the laws. Meta has been doing everything in their power to avoid doing that. See the most recent example: "CJEU declares Meta/Facebook's GDPR approach largely illegal" https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu-declares-metafacebooks-gdpr-approach-largely-illegal https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu-declares-metafacebooks-gdpr-approach...
camillomiller 3y ago
The fact that it transfers data from Instagram is already a gigantic headache for Meta. The sharing of data between Whatsapp and other Meta properties, for example, has been blocked multiple times due to EU privacy laws. Instagram being in the clear in Europe doesn’t automatically means that Threads is, and they clearly don’t wanna take any risk by enrolling EU Instagram users semi-automatically. Moreover, the connection between the Threads account and the Instagram account (i.e. you can’t eliminate a Threads account without eliminating your Instagram account) sounds like the main culprit here. And it’s good that it is. It’s basically a forced user retention pattern that is in place only to favor Meta. In other words, Threads is a can of privacy worms by EU standards. The US is still a privacy wild west and Meta actively lobbies for it to stay that way. Threads is great example of why that is.

thsksbd 3y ago

Or, Meta doesn't want to run afoul EU censorship laws that coming into force soon and EU folks are blocked until European Threads is even more spied and censored on.

floomk 3y ago
[dead]
jdiff 3y ago
This has little, if any, recognizable connection to facts in reality.

constantcrying 3y ago

But they are not accomplishing their goal. The intention is to force these companies not to collect data on EU citizens, not to stop companies from operating in the EU.

AndrewDucker 3y ago
The first will follow from the second. If you have a choice of two social networks to use, one which has your European friends/family on it and one that doesn't then you will be more likely to use the one that has them. This will then exert pressure on the company to do what is necessary to get those people onto its systems.
nickserv 3y ago
Well if they're not operating in the EU then they're not collecting EU user data ;-) On a more serious note, if this spurs other companies into developing products and services that align with EU privacy standards, then all the better. It's not like Meta/FB is a huge contributor to employment or the economy in the EU.

ahahahahah 3y ago

EU laws could actually require a company to identify EU-based users that are using VPN if they actually want to be compliant. Using VPN doesn't somehow make EU laws no longer apply to that user. Most companies just don't care to follow the law. We should be praising Meta for their commitment to the EU ideals here.