Notices by Danny Mekić (dannymekic@mastodon.social)

Twitter (“X”) verzocht het gerechtshof mij een spreekverbod op te leggen. Over mijn eigen persoonsgegevens, waar X al twee jaar inzage in weigert.

Gelukkig heeft het gerechtshof het verzoek afgewezen. NRC en Nu schreven er over 👇

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2025/10/07/geen-spreekverbod-voor-mekic-in-zaak-tegen-x-a4908700

https://www.nu.nl/tech/6371549/gerechtshof-wijst-verzoek-van-x-tot-spreekverbod-voor-nederlander-af.html

Vorige maand begon Twitter (“X”) een kort geding tegen mij. Omdat ik inzage wil in mijn persoonsgegevens, en in wat X met mijn gegevens doet — iets waar iedere Europese burger recht op heeft. Maar in plaats van mijn gegevens, stuurde X een dagvaarding. Gelukkig heeft de rechtbank Amsterdam alle (zeven!) vorderingen van X afgewezen. NRC schreef er een artikel over 👇

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2025/03/27/x-weigert-nederlander-inzage-in-zijn-persoonsgegevens-en-verliest-kort-geding-a4887864

Wordt vervolgd, want X is in de hoofdzaak in hoger beroep gegaan bij het gerechtshof Amsterdam.

'I have nothing to hide'? Yes, until the occupier suddenly turns up on your doorstep. Face recognition, all communications linked to your identity are scanned, and our modern electronic files contain not less, but much more and much more sensitive data, of many more people than in The Second World War. Useful for security? According to Professor Geoffrey Stone, it has never prevented a single attack.

My fourth column in De Volkskrant 👇
https://dannymekic.com/202401/nie-wieder-also-means-never-again-such-databases-of-personal-data

In my opinion, this violates not only the GDPR (no free choice), but also consumer law: the service must comply with the agreement, and by blocking access overnight, the service no longer complies with the agreement.

As a result, I am now unannouncedly locked out of my Facebook account until I make a 'choice' (pay for privacy or now agree to targeted ads, whereas before I did not see any targeted ads).

The second lie consists of Facebook pretending that a law has changed ("Laws are changing") so that people now have to choose to pay or give permission to use personal data. However, no law has changed: this was always the law.

Fortunately, I was able to take a screenshot last week, because Facebook no longer lets you go to your account settings or even your profile at all before you make a 'choice'.

Dishonest 'choice' by Facebook to force users to choose between free use (with a privacy invasion) or pay for privacy.

Why untruthful? First, Facebook says that that I am now using Facebook for free with 'personalized' ads, but that is not true.

The European Commission wants to start eavesdropping on all our private messages, photos/videos and conversations(!) via apps. To pressure the Netherlands and other countries to vote in favour, it posted illegal, misleading ads on Twitter/X. At election time. This is unheard of: