Meta, TikTok, and X lost in a London court their fight against the regulator's data requests.

The High Court of London rejected the appeal by Meta, TikTok, and X against Ofcom, the UK's communications regulator, regarding data requests on content moderation made under the Online Safety Act. It is one of the first tests of the new regime, according to Reuters. The ruling was delivered on Friday, October 30, 2026. The court dismissed the central argument of the three platforms: that the information requests were disproportionate. Reuters did not detail in its report the grounds for the decision or whether the companies can appeal. ADVERTISEMENT Ofcom sent out the notifications in February of the same year. They demanded detailed moderation figures: how many posts were deleted or had their visibility restricted, and how many users were exposed to harmful content. The Online Safety Act of 2023 imposes stricter standards on networks like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X, especially to protect minors. An Ofcom spokesperson welcomed the decision: "Gathering companies' information is fundamental to our ability to do the job." Meta said it was "disappointed" with the ruling, and TikTok reported that it is reviewing the judgment. X did not immediately respond to Reuters inquiries. ADVERTISEMENT The platforms claimed the cost was excessive Meta argued that collecting data "on this scale" exceeds what is necessary and proportionate, and stated that it and other companies in the sector filed the appeal for that reason. X described its notification as "the most expensive information request" it has received from any regulator and estimated it would cost millions of pounds. According to the law firm Wiggin LLP's study, Meta described its notification as a legal-basisless "wish list." The firm drew this phrase from previous reports and cited it in an analysis published on October 19 regarding litigation against Ofcom. The law supports the regulator's requirements with fines of up to 10% of a company's global turnover for the most serious infringements. According to Wiggin, the limit is whichever is higher between that percentage and £18 million. ADVERTISEMENT Meta has two other cases pending against Ofcom The October 30, 2026 ruling does not close the dispute. Reuters pointed out that a potentially more important decision is still outstanding regarding another appeal by Meta: the one questioning how Ofcom calculates the fees paid by platforms and the maximum fines it could impose. That case was heard in a London court in mid-October. The BBC reported in May that Meta considers the calculation method "disproportionate," as it is based on global revenue and applies to companies with annual revenues exceeding £250 million. According to judicial documents cited by the BBC, the system causes "a handful of companies" to account for "the vast majority" of Ofcom's costs. Meta’s lawyer, Monica Carss-Frisk, argued that the calculation is not tied to revenue from services in the UK. ADVERTISEMENT Ofcom then responded that it acted according to "a simple reading of the law." Its legal representative described Meta's questioning of the regulator's expertise as "absurd," according to the MLex service. Meta also challenges the category Ofcom assigned to WhatsApp under the regime. Furthermore, in October, it became the target of Ofcom's first formal investigation under the Online Safety Act, Reuters specified. The ruling on Meta’s fees and fines remains pending, with no date announced in the sources consulted. Meta postpones date for starting to use company web content to train its AI Meta postponed the application of terms that allow it to use content from sites linked to Facebook and Instagram business accounts from October 30 to November 20, 2026. ADVERTISEMENT The move came after questioning from European editors and regulators. Although it eliminated the explicit reference to "training" artificial intelligence and limited the clause to advertising and commercial products, experts warn that it would still enable mass tracking. Meta claims that owners can express their preferences via robots.txt, which the network does not expressly guarantee. The European Commission is reviewing a complaint, while the British CMA assesses possible future intervention measures. ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT