Key facts
- Publishers fear Meta's new terms will allow free use of their content for AI training.
- Meta claims the terms are to pull product information for ads, not scrape news sites.
- The European Commission is reviewing Meta's practices against EU law, including the Digital Markets Act.
- The UK's CMA is investigating Meta's terms due to publisher complaints about its market dominance.
Europe's largest media companies have urged regulators in Brussels and London to halt Meta's new terms, which they claim would permit the company to copy publishers' websites for artificial intelligence training. The European Publishers Council, including POLITICO's owner Axel Springer, wrote to EU competition boss Teresa Ribera and tech chief Henna Virkkunen on Monday, requesting they pause the terms before their October 30 implementation. They seek a review against EU copyright and competition law and have requested an urgent meeting. The European Commission stated it is committed to ensuring Meta's practices comply with EU law, including competition rules and the Digital Markets Act, and is aware of the concerns. In the UK, publishers have complained to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) about Meta's dominant position. CMA chief Sarah Cardell informed lawmakers that the watchdog has asked Meta for an explanation and will meet the company on Wednesday, identifying Meta as a potential target for new tech giant regulations. The terms affect businesses using Meta's tools for Facebook pages, Instagram accounts, or ads, encompassing nearly all newsrooms. The controversy began in the US when Nieman Lab reported that Meta's programs could copy websites to train its products, with no opt-out mechanism. Meta's communications chief, Andy Stone, initially denied the report, stating there was no change to how Meta uses web crawlers and that the update was for pulling product information from shopping sites. However, Meta later revised the terms, removing the word 'train' and clarifying they cover only advertising and business products, though publishers remain skeptical.