Judge Rejects Monopoly Claims
A US district judge in Washington ruled that Meta did not violate antitrust laws when it acquired Instagram and WhatsApp more than a decade ago. The decision marks a setback for the Federal Trade Commission, which sued Meta in 2020 and argued the company used these purchases to secure dominance in social media. Judge James Boasberg wrote that the agency failed to prove its claims and concluded that Meta does not hold monopoly power. Meta welcomed the ruling and said the company competes in a crowded market.
Meta Leaders Point to Fierce Competition
In April, Judge Boasberg oversaw a long bench trial featuring testimony from CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former COO Sheryl Sandberg. They said TikTok and YouTube transformed the market. The judge pointed out that the FTC reviewed and approved both Meta’s 2012 Instagram deal and its 2014 WhatsApp purchase. The agency argued Meta overpaid, spending $1 billion for Instagram and $19 billion for WhatsApp. Boasberg described a rapidly shifting social-media landscape with trends rising and fading. He said the FTC did not prove Meta still holds market power and noted shrinking market share.
Regulators Voice Disappointment
The FTC said it had not decided whether to appeal and expressed deep disappointment with the ruling. Spokesperson Joe Simonson said the agency was considering all options and felt the process leaned against them. He referenced political disputes involving the judge and mentioned efforts by some Republican lawmakers to remove him from office. The judge was asked for comment.
Ruling Prevents Potential Break-Up
The decision protects Meta from a possible forced split that might have separated Instagram and WhatsApp. Meta said its platforms help people and businesses and highlight American innovation and growth. A spokesperson said the company plans to keep working with the administration and to continue investing in the United States.
Antitrust Momentum Appears to Shift
The ruling follows two Justice Department victories against Google involving search and advertising technology. Still, another federal judge recently declined to require Google to divest its Chrome browser. In this climate, experts say the new ruling feels like a shift in momentum. Vanderbilt law professor Rebecca Haw Allensworth said the judgment could influence decisions about future cases. She added that the ruling does not signal failure for the government’s broader antitrust agenda and called the landscape mixed.
Experts Outline the Case’s Challenges
Many legal observers said the FTC faced difficulties from the start. University of Georgia professor Laura Phillips-Sawyer said the fast-changing social-networking market complicated the case. She added that early comments by Zuckerberg suggested a desire to neutralize a rising competitor that threatened the company’s position.
Meta Still Faces Further Legal Scrutiny
Meta continues to confront significant legal challenges. Zuckerberg must testify in a landmark case focused on social media’s impact on young people. Last month, a Los Angeles judge rejected Meta’s attempt to avoid his in-person testimony in January. Instagram chief Adam Mosseri will also testify in a case alleging that social-media platforms design addictive features for young users despite knowing the mental-health risks.
