These laws being byzantine is the result of almost two decades of legal battles. Meta and Google have batteries of competent lawyers and lobbyists, constantly testing for legal loopholes, interpretations and contesting complaints in European courts.
Privacy laws aren't new, they existed before the GDPR. But they were fractured and not up-to-par with the new digital reality of large scale collection of personal data. These laws are geared exactly against the very business model of Google and Meta: offer free services, be first to market and become a gatekeeper, collect user data as broadly as possible, sell business intelligence and marketing services to actual paying customers.
When Meta states that it can't release Threads due to "unknown legal liabilities" that's a round-about way of admitting that their business model doesn't entirely square with European laws, such as they are.
Finally, as far as size in terms of user base, revenue and expenses go, the likes of Meta, Google and Twitter are very much a league of their own. Given their business model and its profitability, it's inevitable that their goals and motives are at odds with the interests and legal rights of citizens.
Privacy laws aren't new, they existed before the GDPR. But they were fractured and not up-to-par with the new digital reality of large scale collection of personal data. These laws are geared exactly against the very business model of Google and Meta: offer free services, be first to market and become a gatekeeper, collect user data as broadly as possible, sell business intelligence and marketing services to actual paying customers.
When Meta states that it can't release Threads due to "unknown legal liabilities" that's a round-about way of admitting that their business model doesn't entirely square with European laws, such as they are.
Finally, as far as size in terms of user base, revenue and expenses go, the likes of Meta, Google and Twitter are very much a league of their own. Given their business model and its profitability, it's inevitable that their goals and motives are at odds with the interests and legal rights of citizens.