Corporate Europe Observatory:

Over the past year, tech industry lobby groups have used their lavish budgets to aggressively push for the deregulation of the EU’s digital rulebook. The intensity of this policy battle is also reflected in the fact that Big Tech companies have on average more than one lobby meeting per day with EU Commission officials.

This lobbying offensive appears to be paying off. Recently, a string of policy-makers have called for a pause of the Artificial Intelligence Act, and there is also a concerted push to weaken people’s data protection rights under the GDPR. Moreover, the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA) are being constantly challenged by Big Tech, including via the Trump administration.

Jack Power, Irish Times:

Meta, the company that owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, has privately tried to convince the Irish Government to lead a pushback against data protection laws at European Union level, correspondence shows.

[…]

“We believe that the EU’s data protection and privacy regimes require a fundamental overhaul and that Ireland has a very important and meaningful role to play in achieving this,” she [Meta’s Erin Egan] wrote.

Thanks to years of being a tax haven, Ireland has now found itself in a position of unique responsibility. For example:

Ms Egan said Meta has been going back and forth with regulators about the company’s plans to train its AI models using public Facebook and Instagram posts.

An effective green light from the Data Protection Commission, which enforces data and privacy laws in Ireland, was a ”welcome step”, she wrote.

The Commission made a series of recommendations giving E.U. citizens more control over the user data Meta is using to train its A.I. models. Still, it means user data on Meta platforms is being used to train A.I. models. While groups in Ireland and Germany objected to those plans, courts seemed largely satisfied with the controls and protections the DPC mandated, and which were so basic this article calls them an “effective green light”.

Though it is apparently satisfied with the outcome, Meta does not want even that level of scrutiny. It wants to export its U.S.-centric view of user privacy rights — that is, that they are governed only by whatever Meta wants to jam into its lengthy terms of service agreements — around the world. I know lobbying is just something corporations do and policymakers are expected to consider their viewpoints. On the other hand, Meta’s entire history of contempt toward user privacy ought to be disqualifying. The correct response to Meta’s letter is to put it through a shredder without a second thought.