If this goes through, I don't see how this survives a court challenge. This is not a competition issue, but a data protection issue. Seems like it's brought und

If this goes through, I don't see how this survives a court challenge. This is not a competition issue, but a data protection issue. Seems like it's brought under competition so that it spares the EU publishers who follow the same model as Meta proposed. From what I read and understand, EU does not have a very good standing here, but only hope is that Meta settles the case instead of fighting it out as it sets a precedent. From what I could see, it's a novel interpretation of Section 5(2). The original section is about "gatekeepers must seek users' consent for combining their personal data between designated core platform services and other services, and if a user refuses such consent, they should have access to a less personalised but equivalent alternative". But this is to do with combination, not access. This part: > users who do not consent should still get access to an equivalent service which uses less of their personal data, in this case for the personalisation of advertising is new and not in the set goals of DMA, but a unique interpretation to stop Meta from offering this. Related: Original complaint: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_3582 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_... Kay Jebelli on why it's under DMA and not GDPR: https://medium.com/chamber-of-progress/the-hidden-reason-why-europe-has-turned-metas-pay-or-okay-into-a-competition-issue-bf6c7f953365 https://medium.com/chamber-of-progress/the-hidden-reason-why...