Paper: GS – II, Subject: Polity, Topic: Judiciary, Issue: Supreme Court’s Ultimatum to Meta and WhatsApp.
Context:
Meta and WhatsApp are facing a Supreme Court ultimatum due to their 2021 privacy policy update, which enabled data sharing with Meta entities and was ruled an abuse of dominance by regulators.
Key Highlights:
Case Background:
- The controversy started in 2021 when WhatsApp introduced a policy allowing greater data sharing with Meta for advertising, despite end-to-end encryption for messages.
- India’s Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a ₹213.14 crore penalty, finding the “take-it-or-leave-it” consent coercive given WhatsApp’s market dominance.
- The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) upheld the fine but softened some restrictions, prompting Meta’s Supreme Court appeal
Key Issues:
- Data Sharing & Privacy: WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy raised concerns over the scope and use of user data shared with Meta. (Right to Privacy (Article 21 – Puttaswamy judgment))
- Abuse of Dominance (CCI): The CCI held that WhatsApp’s “take-it-or-leave-it” policy abused its dominant position, as exiting the platform is unrealistic for most users.
- Economic Value of Data: The Court highlighted “rent-sharing” from user data, shifting the debate from privacy alone to ownership of data-generated profits.
Examples / Value Addition:
- EU GDPR: Requires explicit, granular consent for each data use.
- Puttaswamy Case (2017): Privacy recognised as a fundamental right.
- Google Android Case (CCI): Similar abuse of dominance via ecosystem control.
Judicial Ultimatum: The Supreme Court directed Meta to stop personal data sharing or face dismissal of its case and stringent conditions.
| Key Concept | Detailed explanation |
| Digital Literacy Gap | The Court recognized that India’s diverse population has varying levels of digital literacy, meaning many users cannot grasp the complex terms in WhatsApp’s privacy policy. |
| Transparency vs. Understanding | The Court distinguished that legal transparency (publishing a policy) does not equal user understanding. A “technically transparent” policy is useless if users lack the skills to interpret it. |
| Informed Consent | The validity of consent was questioned. The Court implied that because many users don’t truly understand what they are agreeing to, their “consent” to data sharing may not be legally valid. |
| Vulnerability of Users | The Court highlighted that users with limited digital literacy are vulnerable and easily exploited, often unknowingly consenting to data practices they would not agree to if they understood them. |
| Chief Justice’s Query | Using the example of a “domestic helper,” the Chief Justice illustrated the practical reality of the digital gap, questioning if the average citizen could actually navigate or understand such complex policies. |
The Meta–WhatsApp case marks a decisive shift in India’s digital governance from passive acceptance of platform power to active judicial enforcement of privacy, competition, and meaningful consent. In the data economy, consent cannot be coerced, and privacy cannot be commodified.
Source: (The Hindu)
La Excellence IAS Academy, the best IAS coaching in Hyderabad, known for delivering quality content and conceptual clarity for UPSC 2026 preparation.
FOLLOW US ON:
◉ YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/@CivilsPrepTeam
◉ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LaExcellenceIAS
◉ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/laexcellenceiasacademy/
GET IN TOUCH:
Contact us at info@laex.in, https://laex.in/contact-us/
or Call us @ +91 9052 29 2929, +91 9052 99 2929, +91 9154 24 2140
OUR BRANCHES:
Head Office: H No: 1-10-225A, Beside AEVA Fertility Center, Ashok Nagar Extension, VV Giri Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad, 500020
Madhapur: Flat no: 301, survey no 58-60, Guttala begumpet Madhapur metro pillar: 1524, Rangareddy Hyderabad, Telangana 500081
Bangalore: Plot No: 99, 2nd floor, 80 Feet Road, Beside Poorvika Mobiles, Chandra Layout, Attiguppe, Near Vijaya Nagara, Bengaluru, 560040