NL Judge: Meta must respect user's choice of recommendation system

Penalty Size, Purpose, and Enforcement

• Many note €5M is trivial for Meta; others explain it’s a coercive fine (“last onder dwangsom”) meant to force compliance, not punish past behavior.
• Courts can later raise or change measures if Meta chooses to pay without complying; ignoring a court order would heavily prejudice Meta in future cases.
• The fine accrues daily (max €5M) and is paid to Bits of Freedom, which would be significantly impacted even by a single day’s fine.
• Meta Ireland (not the Dutch subsidiary or US parent) is the entity ordered to implement persistent user choice.

Democracy and Timing

• The two‑week deadline is linked by commenters to Dutch elections, with concern that non‑compliance could affect the democratic process if algorithmic feeds keep amplifying political content and disinformation.
• Some argue that if Meta defies the order and the state doesn’t escalate, it would be politically disastrous.

User Choice, Algorithms, and Lock‑In

• Core issue: Meta offers a non‑profiled/chronological feed but repeatedly resets users back to the algorithmic, profiling‑based feed.
• Many view this as a bait‑and‑switch pattern: build dependence via useful features, then erode user control and push addictive, engagement‑maximizing algorithms.
• Strong disagreement over “just don’t use Facebook/Instagram”:
  • One side says usage is voluntary and alternatives exist.
  • The other cites network effects, job dependencies, events and social ties, calling it de facto essential infrastructure you can’t individually opt out of.

Messaging vs Feeds; Interoperability

• Several want legally mandated ways to use Meta messaging without exposure to feeds (separate apps or disable‑feed options).
• Critics call this unreasonable product micromanagement and argue severe self‑control problems should be solved by not using the platform.
• Others propose interop mandates (open protocols, cross‑app messaging) so users can choose their own client while staying reachable.

Ads, Tracking, and Business Models

• Long subthread on ad‑funded models:
  • Some want the targeted‑ads model banned or made untenable via liability and disclosure rules.
  • Others argue free, ad‑supported services are what users actually choose; subscriptions alone would kill many platforms or reduce reach.
• Several stress that even “ad‑free” subscriptions often don’t stop tracking; the harmful part is pervasive profiling and engagement optimization, not ads per se.

Regulation, Innovation, and “Overreach”

• Supporters see the ruling as overdue protection against societal harms (addiction, election influence, concentration of attention).
• Critics fear Europe’s regulatory mindset will drive companies away and cause technological stagnation; supporters counter that losing Meta could spur European alternatives or that some “progress” isn’t worth its social cost.
• One view frames this as normal democratic control over powerful media, analogous to existing restrictions on political advertising on TV/radio.

Jurisdiction and Experimentation

• Some emphasize this is an implementation of EU‑level law via a Dutch judge; others highlight that different countries trying different approaches is valuable policy experimentation.