Dark Patterns in UX: What Manipulative Practices Are Already Banned in the EU?

User interface design isn’t just about aesthetics and functionality — it’s also about ethics. In recent years, the European Union has taken concrete steps to prohibit manipulative UX tactics known as dark patterns. These deceptive practices are not only unethical but now also illegal in many cases. This article explores what dark patterns are, why they’ve been banned under EU regulation, and how companies can build transparent interfaces that respect user choice.

Understanding Dark Patterns in UX

Dark patterns are design features intentionally created to manipulate users into making choices they might not have made otherwise. These tactics are often subtle but highly effective in achieving business goals at the expense of user autonomy. A classic example is “forced consent”, where users must agree to data sharing in order to access a service — a clear violation of user rights under GDPR and the Digital Services Act.

Another widespread dark pattern is “hidden unsubscribe”. This involves making it needlessly difficult to opt out of a mailing list or subscription. Often buried in hard-to-find pages or written in misleading language, this tactic exploits users’ time and attention.

There are also “confirmshaming” messages that guilt-trip users for opting out. Phrases like “No thanks, I hate saving money” are designed to nudge users into taking actions they didn’t originally intend, which raises serious ethical and legal concerns.

Why These Practices Are Banned in the EU

The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which came into effect in 2023, explicitly bans several types of dark patterns. This includes interfaces that trick, nudge, or coerce users into behaviour through visual manipulation or confusing wording. The goal is to establish a digital environment where users can make informed, free choices.

Additionally, the Digital Markets Act (DMA) introduces stricter rules for “gatekeeper” companies — typically large tech firms — ensuring they provide clear, transparent options in their interface design. These laws work alongside the GDPR to create a harmonised framework that penalises manipulative UX techniques.

The bans are not symbolic. Infringements can lead to significant fines, reaching up to 6% of global turnover for major companies. This underscores the EU’s commitment to defending consumer rights and digital trust.

Real-World Examples of Dark Patterns

Numerous high-profile companies have faced scrutiny for their use of dark patterns. For instance, Amazon was criticised for its complex Prime subscription cancellation process, which involved multiple steps and misleading labels. As of 2022, the company had to simplify the process following regulatory pressure from the EU.

Meta (formerly Facebook) also faced legal challenges for nudging users toward enabling extensive data tracking by designing “agree” buttons to be more prominent and attractive than opt-out options. These practices are under investigation in several EU jurisdictions.

Booking.com was found to exaggerate demand with messages like “Only 1 room left!” or “X people are looking at this hotel right now”. While these may create urgency, they are now considered deceptive under the DSA’s terms and are being phased out in compliant versions of the service.

Lessons from UX Audits of Major Brands

UX audits show that companies relying on deceptive designs often suffer reputational damage and reduced user trust. Ethical design, by contrast, promotes long-term customer loyalty and lower churn rates. Transparency is no longer just a value — it’s a legal obligation and a competitive advantage.

Apple, for example, received praise for its simplified consent management and visible unsubscribe options in newsletters, aligning with ethical UX and complying with EU legislation. Spotify has similarly introduced clearer onboarding flows, allowing users to control their data more effectively.

The shift is clear: the companies that succeed in the EU market are those that prioritise design integrity. This includes accessibility, clear language, and balanced calls-to-action that inform rather than manipulate.

Designing Ethically in a Regulated Environment

To design ethically under the EU’s current regulatory environment, companies must follow best practices that centre on user rights. Clear consent mechanisms, reversible actions, and visible opt-outs are essential components of compliant UX.

Designers should test interfaces using third-party audits and user testing to detect potential dark patterns. Accessibility standards — such as those set by the WCAG — should also be considered, as manipulative practices often disproportionately affect vulnerable users.

Finally, documentation is key. All design decisions should be traceable and justifiable from an ethical and legal standpoint. This transparency is invaluable in the event of audits or consumer complaints, and it also reflects positively on the brand.

How ViewsMonk Can Lead by Example

ViewsMonk, with its focus on ethical marketing, has a unique opportunity to promote responsible UX design as part of its value proposition. By publishing transparent policies and conducting UX audits, it can set a new standard in ethical interface design.

Moreover, educational content about dark patterns and digital ethics could engage users and build a loyal community around shared values. Transparency, once an optional branding tactic, is now a necessity — and ViewsMonk is well-positioned to embrace this shift.

By aligning its design philosophy with regulatory expectations and ethical norms, ViewsMonk can strengthen its credibility and serve as a benchmark for others in the industry.