欧洲最大的新闻出版商正在要求欧盟和英国的监管机构阻止Meta引入新的商业条款，他们担心这些条款可能会允许该公司从其网站复制内容用于人工智能产品。这些变更定于10月30日生效。
Europe’s biggest news publishers are asking regulators in the EU and UK to stop Meta from introducing new business terms that they fear could allow the company to copy content from their websites for use in AI products. The changes are due to take effect on 30 October.
据《政治报》报道，欧洲出版商理事会周一向欧盟竞争事务负责人特蕾莎·里韦拉和科技负责人海娜·维尔库宁发送了一封信，要求他们暂停这些变更，并评估其是否符合欧盟法律。该组织包括拥有《政治报》的德国传媒公司阿克塞尔·施普林格。
The European Publishers Council (EPC) sent a letter on Monday to EU competition chief Teresa Ribera and tech chief Henna Virkkunen, asking them to suspend the changes and assess whether they comply with EU law, POLITICO reported. The group includes Axel Springer, the German media company that owns POLITICO.
这场争端加剧了Meta与欧洲出版商之间关于如何使用其内容以及是否应为此付费的长期冲突。先前的争端已导致法国的付费谈判和意大利的法律诉讼。
The dispute adds to Meta’s ongoing conflicts with European publishers over how it uses their content and whether it should pay for it. Previous disputes have led to payment negotiations in France and a legal challenge in Italy.
欧盟委员会的一位发言人告诉《政治报》，布鲁塞尔已知晓这些变更和出版商的投诉。该发言人表示，Meta必须遵守欧盟规则，包括《数字市场法》。
A European Commission spokesperson told POLITICO that Brussels was aware of the changes and publishers’ complaints. The spokesperson said Meta must comply with EU rules, including the Digital Markets Act.
英国出版商也在极力推动采取行动，他们向竞争与市场管理局表示，Meta对他们的业务具有如此巨大的影响力，以至于他们实际上无法拒绝其条款。
UK publishers are also pushing for action, telling the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) that Meta has so much influence over their businesses that they cannot realistically refuse its terms.
竞争与市场管理局首席执行官萨拉·卡德尔周二对议员们表示，该监管机构已要求Meta解释这些变更，并计划于周三与该公司会面。
CMA chief executive Sarah Cardell told MPs on Tuesday that the regulator had asked Meta to explain the changes and planned to meet the company on Wednesday.
新条款适用于使用Meta工具进行Facebook主页、Instagram账户和广告宣传的企业。这可能包括利用这些平台接触读者或推广其作品的新闻机构。
The new terms apply to businesses using Meta’s tools for Facebook pages, Instagram accounts and advertising. That could include newsrooms that use the platforms to reach readers or promote their work.
尼曼新闻实验室于10月15日首次报道了这些变更。其对原始措辞的分析表明，Meta可以向与商业账户链接的网站发送自动机器人，并使用这些材料来训练其人工智能产品。该媒体报道称，这些条款没有为企业提供明确的拒绝途径。
Nieman Lab first reported the changes on 15 October. Its analysis of the original wording suggested Meta could send automated bots to websites linked to business accounts and use the material to train its AI products. The publication reported that the terms offered businesses no clear way to opt out.
Meta对这种解读提出了异议，其通信负责人安迪·斯通在X平台上称该报道为虚假消息，并表示该公司并未改变使用网络爬虫的方式。
Meta disputed that interpretation, and its communications chief, Andy Stone, called the report false on X and said the company had not changed how it uses web crawlers.
Meta表示，此次更新旨在从购物网站收集产品信息用于广告宣传。
Meta said the update was intended to collect product information from shopping websites for advertising.
周五晚上，Meta修改了其商业条款的措辞，删除了“训练”一词。该公司表示，这些规则仅适用于其广告和商业工具。
On Friday evening, Meta revised the wording of its commercial terms and removed the word “train”. The company said the rules applied only to its advertising and business tools.
“我们听取了你们的意见并希望予以澄清，”一位Meta发言人告诉《政治报》，并补充说这些变更并非旨在允许抓取新闻网站。
“We’ve heard you and want to clarify,” a Meta spokesperson told POLITICO, adding that the changes were not intended to allow the scraping of news websites.
出版商对此仍然存疑。欧洲出版商理事会在信中辩称，Meta的口头保证是不够的，因为修改后的条款没有提供保护出版商内容的具有约束力的保证。
Publishers remain unconvinced. In its letter, the EPC argued that Meta’s verbal assurances were not enough because the revised terms did not provide a binding guarantee that publishers’ content would be protected.
美国出版商组织“数字内容下步”首席执行官杰森·金特对《政治报》表示：“Meta所谓周五晚上的更正简直是一场闹剧。”
“Meta’s supposed Friday night correction is a farce,” Jason Kint, chief executive of US publisher group Digital Content Next, told POLITICO.
德国报纸和杂志协会呼吁布鲁塞尔在调查期间阻止这些变更。他们认为，一旦内容被复制到人工智能系统中，逆转这一过程可能是不可能的。
German newspaper and magazine associations called for Brussels to block the changes while it investigates. They argued that once content has been copied into AI systems, it may be impossible to reverse the process.
这些协会在周二的一份联合声明中表示：“这是肆无忌惮的盗窃。”
“This is unscrupulous theft,” the associations said in a joint statement on Tuesday.