logoalt Hacker News

thyristantoday at 4:13 PM1 replyview on HN

> The individual wasn't the one who truly decided the essential means and purposes beyond personal use

The user is supposed to have read Meta's terms and conditions and agreed to them. Of course nobody does that, but that doesn't absolve of the responsibility, it rather means that the user who uploads stuff to Meta does things in full knowledge and willingly or carelessly. It just might make Meta liable as well, because naturally their terms were sneaky, hidden, unclear and probably illegal.

And I'd guess that Meta Ireland has been sued often enough that they have some export clause deep in their conditions as well, which the user should also have read and agreed to.


Replies

buzertoday at 4:57 PM

The full analysis of this would need to take in account:

* Who actually determines the essential means and purposes for each processing purpose (and is truly doing it). Fashion ID case is quite relevant here.

* If terms which grant Meta these rights and user a lot of obligations would fall under unfair terms or unfair commercial practices directives. If they do then those aspects of the terms are invalid. These could, for example, affect requirement that the user must get consent from data subject for Meta's processing operations.