Judge in the Bits of Freedom vs. Meta lawsuit: Meta must respect users’ choice
On 2 October 2025, the Dutch court made clear that users should be in control of content they see on Meta’s apps. In a landmark victory for digital rights, the judge sided with Bits of Freedom against Meta, ruling that the company is violating the law and it has to adjust its app to respect users’ choices.
About the lawsuit and why it matters
On the 2 October 2025, the Dutch court issued a ruling in the summary proceedings brought by digital human rights organisation Bits of Freedom against Meta. The organisation demanded that Meta provides its users on apps such as Instagram and Facebook the option to select a feed that is not based on profiling.
Bits of Freedom sued Meta for breaching the Digital Services Act (DSA), a key European legislation designed to give users more autonomy and control over the large online platforms. One of the core elements of the DSA is that users must have greater influence over the content they encounter online.
For many people, and especially for young people, social media platforms are a major source of news and information. Therefore, it is crucial that users themselves can decide which content appears on their feed. Without that freedom of choice, participation in the public debate is seriously hampered. That is problematic at any time, but especially during election periods and, inthe Netherlands, national elections will be held at the end of this month.
The judge’s ruling
The judge ruled that Meta is indeed acting in violation of the law, stating that “a non‑persistent choice option for a recommendation system runs counter to the purpose of the DSA, which is to give users genuine autonomy, freedom of choice, and control over how information is presented to them.”
The judge further concluded that the way Meta has designed its platforms constitutes “a significant disruption of the autonomy of Facebook and Instagram users.” As a result, Meta must adjust its apps so that the user’s choice is preserved, even when the user navigates to another section or restarts the app.
“We are pleased that the judge now makes clear that Meta must respect the user’s choice,” says Maartje Knaap, spokesperson for Bits of Freedom. “It is absolutely unacceptable that a handful of American tech billionaires determine how we see the world. That concentration of power poses a risk to our democracy. At the same time, it is regrettable that we need to go to court to ensure Meta complies with the law.”
Meta has an interest in steering users toward a feed where it can display as many interest‑ and behavior‑based ads as possible: it’s the core of Meta’s revenue model. Subtle design techniques push users toward that feed, while the non‑profiled feed is hidden behind a logo, making it hard to find. Users who do choose the alternative timeline also lose direct access to features such as Direct Messages. Moreover, each time the app is opened, it always starts with Meta’s feed, even if the user selected a different one before. Because of the judge’s ruling, Meta must now change its behavior.
How the ruling should be interpreted throughout Europe
The Dutch court’s decision formally applies only to the Netherlands, as this is the extent of its jurisdiction. Meta can therefore interpret this as something that must be implemented in the country. However, at the same time, the legislation underlying that decision – the DSA – applies across the European Union. There is no reason to assume that a court in another country would reach a substantially different conclusion. In that light, this ruling should be interpreted as having a wider European significance.
“This ruling shows that Meta is not untouchable,” continues Maartje Knaap. “But we are also realistic, this is just a drop in the ocean. There’s still a long way to go. We hope the decision will inspire individuals, civil society organisations, regulators and lawmakers worldwide around the world who are working to rein in Meta’s power. Together we can stand up to a company that has become overwhelmingly powerful.”
This decision is a milestone for user rights, a reminder that even the biggest platforms can be held accountable. The fight for digital autonomy is far from over, but this ruling shows that change is possible.
You can find the ruling on the website of Bits of Freedom (original in Dutch). A translated English version is also available.
Contribution by: EDRi member, Bits of Freedom