Privacy crusaders accuse X of ad-targeting that flouts EU rules An EU privacy rights group has filed a complaint against Elon Musk's X, alleging the platform unlawfully targeted advertisements from the bloc's Home Affairs directorate in a bid to build public support for hotly contested "chat control" legislation. Austria-based noyb (none of your business) alleges that the EU Home Affairs …
Only if they pay it. They would appeal it, and even if it is upheld even after all avenues for appeal ran out they'd probably just refuse to pay. Though probably by the time the appeals run out Twitter will be in a Wikipedia article alongside MySpace and GeoCities about once huge social media sites that are now defunct.
I think GeoCities is actually dead now, though it continued on for a lot longer than people may have thought. MySpace, however, is still very much around. Maybe a pale shadow of its glory days where it was a contender to take the #1 spot instead of Facebook, but it's found a small, yet profitable, niche.
They'll soon run up that $20M in lawyer fees unless Musk has taken a leaf out of his bosses playbook and decided never to pay his lawyers (or anyone else for that matter)
Personally, I hope that Twatter goes TITSUP very soon. Musk is a thin skinned petulant child. Please take your ball and go home and take all those Tesla's with you.
This is unintentional on the part of Xitter, but also one of those things that would have been caught and handled by the thousands of staffers Xitler fired immediately after taking over. So, by intentionally gutting the team that makes sure the service is in compliance with various regulations in different countries, I hope the EU just helps move the inevitable along and put Xitter out of its misery. I also hope, though don't really expect, that they find reason to make Xitler personally liable for any fines Xitter isn't able to cover after liquidating its remaining assets.
"I also hope, though don't really expect, that they find reason to make Xitler personally liable for any fines Xitter isn't able to cover after liquidating its remaining assets."
He IS the owner and in a very obvious way exercises absolute control over the company. He could have just continued to buy stock in Twitter and been able to demand many of the changes he's been doing without the same level of exposure. There may have even been some adult supervision left to keep him out of trouble. His new top of the line Gulfstream jet is going to be kept busy taking him all over the place for court dates and government enquiry appearances.
Indeed. It is of course the EU Home Affairs directorate which committed crime, If the court decides it *was* a crime. Twitter didn’t force the EU to target ads, they presented it as a option. It was the Commission which ticked the box. Logically, it is the Commission which should be fined 4% of their annual turnover.
They are X users and it is the systems which belong to X doing the targeting, as well as X performing the advertising as per the campaign. Therefore, X should be fined through and through. It is about time webmasters are treated as primarily responsible for what they show on their website, because doing that would not only stop the likes of YouTube from running scam campaigns but might also make smaller site owners think twice before adding garbage targeted advertising services in the first place.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
