Meta appeals CCI’s ₹213 crore penalty over WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy

Social media giant Meta has filed an appeal with the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against a ₹213.14 crore penalty imposed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The fine relates to WhatsApp’s controversial 2021 privacy policy update, which the CCI deemed an abuse of Meta’s dominant market position.

Meta has requested an urgent hearing, arguing that the CCI order could have broad implications for the entire tech industry. The appellate tribunal is set to take up the case on January 16.

Last November, the CCI ordered WhatsApp to refrain from sharing user data collected on its platform with Meta products or affiliated companies for advertising purposes for a period of five years. This directive accompanied a significant penalty against Meta.

Meta maintains that the 2021 privacy policy update was misunderstood. A company spokesperson clarified: "We also ensured no one would have their accounts deleted or lose functionality of the WhatsApp service because of this update. The update was about introducing optional business features on WhatsApp, and provided further transparency about how we collect and use data."

The update, according to Meta, was introduced to facilitate optional business features and provide more transparency on data usage.

WhatsApp, with over 500 million monthly active users in India, also expressed disagreement with the CCI’s ruling last year, announcing its intent to challenge the decision.

The CCI probe, initiated in March 2021, scrutinised WhatsApp’s revised privacy policy. The commission argued that the update required users to accept expanded data-sharing terms with Meta and its subsidiaries, constituting a “take-it-or-leave-it” scenario.

“The 2021 policy update by WhatsApp on a ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ basis constitutes an imposition of unfair conditions under the Act, as it compels all users to accept expanded data collection terms,” the CCI stated.

Meta argues that the CCI’s decision could set a precedent affecting the broader technology industry. Critics of the ruling say it challenges how tech companies balance business models dependent on user data while adhering to regulatory frameworks.