Meta has postponed the introduction of revised business account terms after publishers and open-web advocates warned that the proposed wording could allow the company to scrape vast amounts of online content, potentially to build competing artificial intelligence products.
The update had been scheduled to take effect on October 30, 2026. Following the criticism, Meta confirmed that its current business terms would continue to apply while it considered feedback from industry representatives. The company has yet to announce when the revised terms could be introduced.
What the proposed terms would allow
The proposed conditions would have allowed Meta to deploy web crawlers, bots and other automated software to access, index, analyse and retrieve information from websites linked to business accounts.
Media organisations argued that the wording could give Meta access to commercially published content without separate permission or compensation. They also raised concerns that information collected through these methods could potentially be used to develop AI products competing with publishers.
Critics said the update would have applied to all business clients, regardless of opposition, and without payment for the extracted content.
Meta’s response
Meta has disputed that interpretation. The company said the changes were intended to improve its advertising and business services by helping it obtain accurate information about products available on external websites.
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the update was not designed to enable the scraping of news websites, and the company maintained that its existing use of web crawlers would remain unchanged. Stone said the update was designed to make sure Meta could pull accurate information about products for sale on third-party websites when making on-platform advertising and content recommendations.
After criticism, Meta removed the word “train” from the updated terms. On October 29, Meta said it was listening to feedback and that, for now, its existing terms remain in place.
Norway and the UK step in
The proposed changes attracted scrutiny from regulators and media organisations in Europe. A Norwegian court issued a temporary injunction on October 28, suspending the revised conditions after 180 media companies challenged them.
The Norwegian Media Businesses’ Association supported the case, representing publishers whose newspapers account for approximately 97% of circulation in the country. Norwegian publishers have asked Meta to recognise restrictions placed on content collection and to require separate, voluntary agreements — with payment — before using journalism in AI products.
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority subsequently opened an investigation into the proposed terms on October 30. The regulator said it was examining whether requiring news publishers and other content businesses to accept the conditions could constitute unfair trading practices. The European Commission also confirmed discussions with Meta regarding the changes.
The Movement for an Open Web welcomed the postponement but said regulatory action would still be necessary to prevent technology companies from imposing unfair conditions on businesses.
Why it matters
The dispute sits at the centre of the fight over who pays for the content that trains and feeds AI systems. Publishers argue that a platform’s business terms should not become a back door to their journalism; Meta argues it only wants accurate product information to run its advertising and business products better.
Because the terms never took effect, no news site was scraped under them. What happens next depends on the consultation Meta has promised, the Norwegian court’s full assessment, and the CMA’s investigation — none of which has yet produced a final ruling.
For businesses, the practical position is unchanged for now: the existing terms apply. For publishers, the unresolved question is whether any revised wording will include an opt-out, separate agreements, or payment for journalism used in AI products.
What happens next
Watch for Meta’s revised wording after its industry consultation, the outcome of the Norwegian legal review, and the CMA’s findings on whether the conditions amount to unfair trading practices. Any of those could set a precedent for how platforms may — or may not — use business relationships to collect web content.
Sources
MoneyControl, “Meta delays new business terms after publishers raise concerns over AI data scraping,” November 3, 2026: https://www.moneycontrol.com/technology/meta-delays-new-business-terms-after-publishers-raise-concerns-over-ai-data-scraping-article-14067295.html/amp
ETV Bharat, “Meta Delays New Business Terms After Outcry Over Potential Web Scraping Of News Sites,” November 3, 2026: https://www.etvbharat.com/en/business/meta-delays-new-business-terms-after-outcry-over-potential-web-scraping-of-news-sites-enn26110301004
Goodreturns, “Meta postpones business account terms after Europe raises web scraping concerns,” November 3, 2026: https://www.goodreturns.in/news/meta-postpones-business-account-terms-after-european-scraping-concerns-011-1544793.html
Frequently asked questions
Did Meta’s new terms take effect? No. They were due on October 30, 2026, but Meta paused the rollout and its existing business terms remain in place.
Has the UK found Meta broke competition rules? No. The Competition and Markets Authority opened an investigation on October 30; it has not announced a finding.
What do publishers want instead? Separate, voluntary agreements before journalism is used in AI products, with payment and safeguards against being disadvantaged for refusing.
