Facebook owner Meta forced into fresh climbdown over plans to ‘steal’ UK publishers’ content after humiliating defeat in European court, as bosses branded ‘hypocrites’
Meta is likely to delay changes to its Facebook and Instagram terms for a second time after a court in Norway agreed to review their legality. UK publishers fear the terms would let Meta copy their material without payment, including content on publishers’ own websites, and use it to develop AI models.
The changes had already been postponed until 20 November amid criticism from MPs, peers and campaigners. Norwegian publishers argued the terms could cover articles, pictures and videos, including material behind paywalls, with no way to opt out. Meta denies the changes are intended to support AI training or scraping news websites; the UK publishers’ association has accused the company of hypocrisy, citing its own restrictions on automated data collection.
In short
- Meta may delay its platform terms again after a Norwegian court ruling.
- Publishers fear the changes would allow unpaid copying of their content.
- Meta denies the terms are aimed at scraping news for AI training.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Publishers can argue that broad terms allowing Meta to reuse material, potentially including paywalled work, would weaken their control over content and undermine the revenue that funds journalism. They may also say that clear consent, payment and safeguards are reasonable when a company uses others’ work to develop commercial products, particularly if its own rules restrict automated collection of data.
The case against
Meta can argue that the terms are not intended to enable AI training or scraping of publishers’ websites, and that updating platform rules does not itself establish that content will be used in those ways. It may also contend that consistent, workable terms are needed to operate its services across markets, while any specific legal limits should be settled through the court review rather than assumed from publishers’ concerns.
Explained simply
Meta operates Facebook and Instagram, platforms where publishers can share links, articles, images and videos with readers. The company sets terms governing what users and organisations can post and how that material may be used.
Publishers produce news and other material for their own websites, sometimes placing it behind a paywall. They are concerned that Meta’s proposed terms could allow it to copy that material without payment or a way to opt out; Meta says the changes are not intended to support AI training or the collection of news websites’ content.
The dispute involves publishers in the UK and Norway, where a court is reviewing the terms’ legality. It matters because the outcome could affect how publishers’ work is used by large technology companies and what control or payment creators can expect.
Business Europe Markets UK World