Frankfurt court holds Meta liable for scam ads using Finanzfluss brand

A German court has ruled that Meta is liable for scam ads on Facebook and Instagram that misused the brand of a personal finance site. The Regional Court in Frankfurt am Main gave the judgment on 16 September in case 2-06 O 234/25. It is not final, and Meta can appeal.

The claimants were Finflow GmbH, which runs the German finance portal Finanzfluss, and its founder Thomas Kehl. Fake ads used the Finanzfluss logo and Kehl’s face to lure users into dubious investment offers. According to the court’s press release, the company reported nearly 260 such ads in August 2024 alone. Removal took up to 62 days.

Frankfurt judges say Meta’s ad auction decides what users see

The court ordered Meta to stop showing the fake ads and any ads with the same content. Meta must also pay for current and future damage and disclose details of the ads, including the revenue it earned from them.

The key point is the argument Meta lost. Platforms usually say they host content and act only after a notice. The court said Meta cannot claim it did not know, because it steers what appears in feeds through algorithms and its ad auction. Legal site beck-aktuell reports the judges refused Meta the safe harbour in Article 6 of the Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU law on online platforms. They also relied on a June 2026 ruling of the EU Court of Justice in cases C-188/24 and C-190/24. The EU already treats large services as platforms with extra duties under the DSA.

Meta rejects the ruling and cites 159 million removed ads

Meta told trade title kress.de that it disagrees “with all due respect” and is weighing its next steps. According to beck-aktuell, the company says it removed more than 159 million scam ads last year, 92% of them before anyone reported them. Kehl told kress.de the judgment “goes in the right direction”. His law firm, Spirit Legal, calls it the first ruling of its kind in Germany.

Pressure is building in other markets too. Poland has asked the EU to fine Meta €250 million over scam ads, and a Warsaw court sided with InPost founder Rafał Brzoska against Meta earlier this year.

Brands whose faces appear in scam ads gain a new route

The winners, if the ruling stands, are brands and public figures whose names are used in fake ads. They could seek damages and ad revenue data from the platform, not just ask for takedowns. The loser is Meta’s notice-and-takedown defence. The next test is an appeal to the Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt, if Meta files one.