-+ 0.00%
-+ 0.00%
-+ 0.00%

On September 17, a German court ruled that Meta is responsible for false advertisements posted by third parties on Instagram and Facebook, and requested it to delete relevant content and pay compensation for losses. The case involved a German financial portal and its founder. The site and its founder's registered trademarks and likeness were used without permission in suspected fraudulent investment recommendation advertisements. The court said the portal reported nearly 260 cases of infringing content to Meta in August 2024 alone, and some ads were removed with a delay of up to 62 days. The court found that Meta could not defend against liability with “ignorance” in the Digital Services Act because it has control over the content of the platform through algorithms and advertising mechanisms. The ruling also required Meta to disclose the relevant false advertising and the revenue it earns. Meta said it disagreed with the ruling and is considering next steps. The ruling has not yet finally entered into force and can still be appealed.

Zhitongcaijing·09/17/2026 11:33:11
Listen to the news
On September 17, a German court ruled that Meta is responsible for false advertisements posted by third parties on Instagram and Facebook, and requested it to delete relevant content and pay compensation for losses. The case involved a German financial portal and its founder. The site and its founder's registered trademarks and likeness were used without permission in suspected fraudulent investment recommendation advertisements. The court said the portal reported nearly 260 cases of infringing content to Meta in August 2024 alone, and some ads were removed with a delay of up to 62 days. The court found that Meta could not defend against liability with “ignorance” in the Digital Services Act because it has control over the content of the platform through algorithms and advertising mechanisms. The ruling also required Meta to disclose the relevant false advertising and the revenue it earns. Meta said it disagreed with the ruling and is considering next steps. The ruling has not yet finally entered into force and can still be appealed.