Europe's major news publishers have made a second formal push to stop Meta's new commercial terms before they take effect on November 20, asking the European Commission to examine the rules under the Digital Markets Act and, if it cannot act in time, to obtain a commitment from Meta to postpone them.
The European Publishers Council, a Brussels-based trade body representing large news publishers, published its statement on October 23 — the same day Meta pushed the effective date of its revised Commercial Terms and Self-Serve Ad Terms from October 30 to November 20, according to a detailed account by trade publication PPC Land. Reuters reported the delay the same day, noting criticism from publishers and advertisers. For more context on this story, see our ongoing artificial intelligence updates.
What Meta Changed, and Why Publishers Call It Cosmetic
At the center of the dispute is a clause governing how Meta's automated systems may crawl business websites linked to Facebook and Instagram pages. When PPC Land first examined the incoming terms in mid-October, the text authorized Meta to crawl business websites and use their content to train AI starting October 30. The Verge subsequently reported that Meta had dropped the training language; PPC Land's checks found the sentence still present in the UK English preview a day after that report, before the free-standing training authorization disappeared from the preview by the evening of October 23. What remained was a crawling permission tied to stated purposes around advertising, business products, and the integrity and security of Meta's services.
The publishers' verdict on that revision is blunt: little has changed in substance. In the council's reading, Meta "has removed the express reference to 'train' from its website-scraping provision" but dropping the word does not exclude fine-tuning or what it calls AI grounding — the use of publisher content to inform AI-generated answers. Businesses that depend on Facebook and Instagram, the council argues, have no practical right to refuse the crawling while staying on the platforms.
The Ask: Interim Measures or a Postponement
The council wants the Commission to examine whether the terms breach the Digital Markets Act and EU competition law, and to adopt interim measures before November 20 if warranted. If the regulator cannot move that fast, the council is asking it to obtain an "immediate undertaking" from Meta to postpone the contested provisions until the review concludes.
The group has not published the letter itself, and its statement does not say when it was sent or whether the Commission has replied. PPC Land notes the statement is an advocacy position from a party to the dispute, not a regulatory finding. Angela Mills Wade, the council's executive director, promoted the statement on LinkedIn on Friday morning, keeping pressure on Brussels as the new deadline approaches.
A Familiar Fight Over AI Content Rights
The dispute is the latest round in a broader struggle between AI developers and content owners over whether publicly accessible material can be absorbed into AI systems without permission or payment. Publishers have pursued parallel tracks on both sides of the Atlantic: copyright lawsuits against model developers, licensing negotiations, and regulatory complaints aimed at platform terms that grant sweeping crawling rights.
Meta's case has a structural twist. Businesses that rely on Facebook and Instagram for sales and visibility cannot realistically exit the platforms, which the council argues makes consent meaningless — the terms apply by default, and the alternative to accepting them is losing access to the audience. In the publishers' framing, that converts a seemingly technical update to commercial terms into a compulsory transfer of content rights, one clause at a time.
Why the DMA Matters Here
The Digital Markets Act is the EU's competition rulebook for the handful of platform companies it designates as "gatekeepers," a list that has included Meta since 2023. Unlike ordinary privacy or copyright law, the DMA gives the Commission standing tools to police the terms gatekeepers impose on business users, with penalties that can reach 10 percent of a company's worldwide annual turnover for violations.
That enforcement teeth is precisely why the publishers' council is routing its complaint through competition law rather than copyright alone. A copyright case over AI training could take years in court; a DMA proceeding over unfair trading terms can, in principle, produce interim measures in weeks — which is why the group is explicitly asking for interim relief before November 20 rather than a full investigation.
What Happens Next
The Commission has not publicly responded, and it remains unclear whether it will open a formal review before the November 20 effective date. Meta has already signaled flexibility on timing once by moving the date back three weeks; whether it would go further under regulatory pressure is unknown.
For publishers, the stakes extend past one company's terms of service. How the EU treats Meta's crawling clause could shape the template other platforms use to authorize AI use of web content — and determine whether permission, payment, or silence becomes the default for the open web's relationship with AI.
---
Stay Ahead of AIGet the latest AI news, analysis, and breakthroughs — all in one place.
Read more AI news →
