Licensed gambling firms take Meta to court over illegal adverts
Licensed operators say Facebook and Instagram are failing to sufficiently block adverts from illegal gambling sites.
Dutch gambling firms with licences are taking Meta to court. They accuse the technology company of failing to sufficiently block adverts from illegal gambling sites and are also filing a complaint with the European Commission.
The case centres on adverts on Facebook and Instagram. According to industry association VNLOK, more than 70,000 gambling adverts were visible on Meta platforms in the final quarter of 2025. The association says that more than 95 per cent came from operators without a Dutch licence. Those percentages come from the industry itself and have not been established by an independent regulator.
The licensed operators believe they are being disadvantaged by the adverts. They must comply with rules on advertising, age limits, player protection and oversight, while illegal operators can, in their view, reach Dutch consumers through the same advertising infrastructure without those obligations.
According to the industry and NOS, Meta mainly removes adverts after they have been reported. In the first half of 2026, the Kansspelautoriteit stepped up its cooperation with online platforms. A letter to the Lower House states that the regulator submitted 15,000 removal requests to Meta between 1 and 15 May.
The issue forms part of a broader debate about the responsibility of large platforms. The Digital Services Act requires very large online platforms to assess risks on their services and take measures against illegal content. The ACM reported in June that Dutch regulators see many adverts for illegal products and services on social media.
For Meta, the legal question is how far that responsibility extends. The platform receives adverts from third parties and uses automated systems and reporting procedures to identify breaches. The gambling firms believe this approach operates retrospectively and therefore does not provide effective control. The public sources consulted contain no substantive response from Meta to this specific Dutch court case.
The Dutch government is also working on a stricter advertising policy for online gambling. The cabinet has announced that it wants to almost entirely ban advertising for licensed online games of chance, while warning at the same time that illegal adverts will not disappear automatically as a result. The case could therefore have consequences for both platforms and licence holders, as well as for enforcement of European digital rules.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Licensed gambling firms have announced legal action against Meta.
- The Kansspelautoriteit has submitted removal requests to Meta.
- The government is working on stricter rules for gambling advertising.
Left
Arguments Platforms should be held jointly responsible for commercial systems that reach vulnerable users. From this perspective, self-regulation and removing content retrospectively are insufficient.
Values Consumer protection, public health, the protection of young people and limiting the power of technology companies.
Consequences Stricter platform obligations could limit gambling-related harm, but increase costs and liability risks for digital services.
Centre
Arguments Enforcement should focus on verifiable processes: better reporting channels, transparent advertising archives and clear responsibilities between operators, platforms and regulators.
Values Proportionality, legal certainty, practicality and independent oversight.
Consequences A procedural approach may be more effective than a general ban, but requires continuing regulatory capacity.
Right
Arguments Licensed firms should not be pushed out by illegal competitors, but platforms should not automatically be held liable for every third-party advert. The emphasis should be on targeted detection of illegal operators.
Values Freedom of enterprise, competitive neutrality, individual responsibility and limited government intervention.
Consequences Targeted enforcement leaves room for legal market participants, but may offer less protection when illegal adverts spread rapidly.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The legal action and the Dutch enforcement context were confirmed by NOS, the Lower House and the ACM. Industry figures were attributed to VNLOK as claims and not presented as independently established facts.
- confirmed Dutch licensed gambling firms are taking Meta to court. — Reported by NOS. source
- confirmed VNLOK reported more than 70,000 gambling adverts in the final quarter of 2025. — Attributed to VNLOK by NOS. source
- uncertain According to VNLOK, more than 95 per cent came from illegal operators. — This is an industry claim without independent verification in the sources used. source
- confirmed The Kansspelautoriteit submitted 15,000 removal requests to Meta between 1 and 15 May. — Mentioned in a Lower House letter on games of chance. source
- confirmed The ACM reported that regulators see many adverts for illegal products and services on social media. — According to the ACM’s DSA discussion in the Lower House. source