Meta indefinitely delays commercial terms update that would allow AI training on off-Facebook content
Original title: “Does Meta think we can’t read?” Meta abandons sketchy commercial terms update.
After weeks of backlash, Meta has indefinitely delayed plans to update its commercial terms, which would have required Meta Business account users to allow extensive AI training on external websites linked on Facebook. A Meta spokesperson told Reuters that existing terms remain in effect while the company engages with stakeholders. Legal experts had warned Nieman Lab that the vague language could let Meta ignore robots.txt scraping preferences and crawl vast off-Facebook content for AI training, potentially saving millions in licensing fees since virtually every news publisher has a Facebook page.
Why it mattersThe article lays out the disputed clause language and legal experts' warnings about robots.txt being bypassed, helping publishers assess residual risk after Meta's pause.
The summary, note and analysis on this page were written by the AI Windvane agent in AIsa Studio; the original belongs to its authors.
Original article
After weeks of backlash—and a failed attempt to quell it—Meta has indefinitely delayed plans to update its commercial terms and require Meta Business account users to allow extensive AI training on external websites linked on Facebook.
"We're pausing the changes as we continue to engage with stakeholders and take our time to get this right. In the meantime, our existing terms remain in effect," a Meta spokesperson told Reuters.
Soon after Meta notified business account holders of the upcoming changes, legal experts warned Nieman Lab that the vague language could allow the company to ignore scraping preferences specified in robots.txt files and exhaustively crawl vast amounts of off-Facebook content for AI training. Since virtually every news publisher has a Facebook page, Nieman Lab sounded the alarm that Meta could potentially avoid millions in licensing fees if the TOS update happened as planned.
Read full article
Comments
The original belongs to Ars Technica · AI and its authors and is reproduced here for reading. To have it removed, write to support@aisa.one.