D3 brings class actions on addictive design against Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and YouTube

D3 brings four actions against major online platforms

In April and May 2026, D3 brought four cases before the Portuguese civil courts against Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and YouTube. The proceedings took the form of a “popular action”, that is, a specific legal mechanism for collective redress provided for in the Portuguese Constitution in which D3 acts as a collective representative of the rights of people in Portugal.

The cases concern the business models of major platforms and the incentives created by the attention economy. D3 argues that the platforms’ business models should not depend on design mechanisms that undermine users’ ability to exercise control over their own use of digital services.

The purpose of the actions is to seek greater accountability from platforms and to ensure that users can have a safer experience online.

The actions were brought by a team of lawyers led by Miguel Miranda and Efigénia Marabuto Tavares, from Andersen Tax & Legal Iberia. Academic experts Fabrizio Esposito and Cecília Isola, from NOVA School of Law, also supported the cases.

How addictive design can shape online behaviour

Online platforms have access to large amounts of information about users’ behaviour and interactions. Such concentration of information gives a small number of companies significant power to shape how people interact with their services.

The actions focus on design practices commonly described as dark patterns, including infinite scrolling, automatic playback, persistent notifications, personalised recommendation systems and gamification. Together, these features act as a powerful force that makes people spend more time on platforms and interact with them more frequently.

The case argues that such practices draw on knowledge of human behaviour and psychology, combined with information about users’ preferences, vulnerabilities and interests. The resulting systems can make it more difficult for users to stop using a service voluntarily and can reduce the scope for independent decision-making.

Research across fields including medicine, psychology, sociology and technology has examined the relationship between digital design and compulsive patterns of use. The issue has also received attention from the European Parliament and the European Commission, as well as in legal proceedings in the United States and by EDRi member Bits of Freedom in the Netherlands.

Safer platforms instead of restricting access

One of the groups of people most vulnerable to deceptive and manipulative design of platforms are young people. So far, the EU’s response to calls for protecting them has unfortunately been limited to age gates and restrictions, putting the responsibility on the individual rather than the platforms.

D3 argues that restricting access to social media for people under 16 should not be treated as a substitute for addressing potentially harmful design practices. Social media platforms have become important means of communication and interaction, making it necessary to address the design of these services rather than simply excluding particular groups from them.

As D3 president Ricardo Lafuente explains, platforms can provide a healthier online environment if effective rules are properly enforced and responsibility is placed on platforms that fail to comply with them.

Towards stronger European action on addictive design

The Portuguese cases contribute to a growing European debate about platform design, user autonomy and platform accountability. D3’s approach focuses on the responsibilities of platforms and the conditions under which digital services are designed and operated.

With similar initiatives potentially being prepared in other EU Member States, cooperation between digital rights organisations and legal initiatives could help develop a coordinated European response to addictive design.

The objective is not to prevent people from using social media, rather to support an online environment in which users retain meaningful control over their digital experiences.

People should not have to choose between access to essential online services and the ability to use those services without being subjected to design practices that encourage compulsive use.

Contribution by: Eduardo Santos, D3 – Defesa dos Direitos Digitais, EDRi member; Fabrizio Esposito, NOVA School of Law