GBAF Logo
Global Banking & Finance Awards® 2026 Nominations open, free to enter Nominate now →
German court rules Meta liable for fake ads on Instagram, Facebook - Finance news and analysis from Global Banking & Finance Review
Finance

German court rules Meta liable for fake ads on Instagram, Facebook

Published by Global Banking & Finance Review

Posted on September 17, 2026

2 min read

· Last updated: September 17, 2026

Add as preferred source on Google

Meta Ruled Liable by German Court for Fake Investment Ads on Instagram, Facebook

German Court Decision and Implications for Meta

Background of the Lawsuit

Sept 17 (Reuters) - A German court has ruled that Meta is liable for fake advertisements posted by third parties on its Instagram and Facebook platforms, and ordered the U.S. tech giant to remove such content and pay damages, the court said on Thursday.

The lawsuit was brought by the operator of a German financial portal and its founder, whose trademarked logo and image were used without consent in posts recommending investments allegedly with fraudulent intent.

Details of the Violations and Meta's Response

Reported Violations and Meta's Actions

• The portal operator reported nearly 260 violations to Meta in August 2024 alone; however, Meta took up to 62 days to remove some content, the court said.

Legal Reasoning and Precedents

• It ruled Meta could not rely on the Digital Services Act's lack-of-knowledge defence, because unlike purely chronological feeds, it exercises control over the content through its algorithms and advertising practices.

• The court referred to a precedent set by a June ruling by the European Court of Justice.

Meta's Statement

• "We respectfully disagree with this decision and are considering next steps," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement, adding that the company had taken significant action, including proactive detection measures and removal of reported content.

Consequences and Next Steps

Disclosure and Financial Implications

• According to the ruling, dated September 16, Meta must also disclose details of the fake advertisements and revenue generated from them.

Appeal Process

• The ruling is not yet final and may be challenged by lodging an appeal, the court said.

Reporting Credits

(Reporting by Linda Pasquini, Editing by Miranda Murray)

Key Takeaways

  • Meta held responsible for third‑party fake ads using Finanzfluss’s trademarks and image, ordered to remove them and pay damages
  • Court rejected Meta’s DSA reliance, citing algorithmic control over content distribution
  • Meta must disclose details of the fake ads and revenues; ruling refers to EU Court of Justice precedent and can be appealed

Frequently Asked Questions

Why was the lawsuit brought against Meta in Germany?
The lawsuit was filed because a German financial portal and its founder discovered their trademarked logo and image were used without consent in fake investment ads on Instagram and Facebook.
What did the German court rule regarding Meta's liability?
The court ruled that Meta is liable for fake advertisements posted by third parties on its platforms and ordered the company to remove such content and pay damages.
How did Meta respond to the court's decision?
Meta disagreed with the court's decision and stated it is considering next steps, highlighting its efforts on proactive detection and content removal.
What must Meta disclose according to the ruling?
Meta must disclose details about the fake advertisements and revenue generated from these ads.
Is the court ruling against Meta final?
No, the ruling is not yet final and may be challenged by lodging an appeal.

Tags

Related Articles

More from Finance

Explore more articles in the Finance category