Meta doesn’t have social media monopoly, decide guidelines | EUROtoday

A US district decide in Washington has dominated that Facebook-parent Meta Platforms didn’t violate antitrust legal guidelines with its acquisitions of photo-sharing app Instagram and messaging service WhatsApp greater than a decade in the past.

The determination palms a defeat to the Federal Trade Commission, the US antitrust watchdog, which sued Meta in 2020 claiming the corporate secured a monopoly in social media by buying its rivals.

“The Court ultimately concludes that the agency has not carried its burden: Meta holds no monopoly in the relevant market,” wrote Judge James Boasberg on Tuesday.

The firm hailed the choice in a press release offered to the BBC, saying it “recognizes that Meta faces fierce competition.”

In April, Judge Boasberg presided over a prolonged bench trial that featured testimony from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg who argued that TikTok and YouTube had shaken up the social media panorama.

In his determination, Judge Boasberg famous that the FTC reviewed and authorised of Meta’s 2012 acquisition of Instagram and the 2014 acquisition of WhatsApp.

The company had argued the corporate overpaid when it bought Instagram for $1 billion and WhatsApp for $19 billion.

Judge Boasberg described a continually altering social media panorama, “with apps surging and receding, chasing one craze and moving on from others, and adding new features with each passing year.

Even if Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, he said the FTC failed to show “that it continues to carry such energy now” as Meta’s market share “appears to be shrinking.”

In a statement to the BBC, the FTC indicated it wasn’t certain whether it plans to appeal.

“We are deeply disenchanted on this determination,” said Joe Simonson, director of Public Affairs at the FTC, who added the agency was reviewing all of its options.

Simonson also told the BBC that “the deck was all the time stacked towards us with Judge Boasberg,” who has clashed multiple times with the Trump administration and is facing an effort by congressional Republicans to have him impeached.

The BBC has asked Judge Boasberg for comment.

With its victory on Tuesday, Meta avoids a potential break-up of the company which could have included spinning off Instagram and WhatsApp.

“Our merchandise are useful for folks and companies and exemplify American innovation and financial progress,” a Meta spokesperson told the BBC on Tuesday. “We look ahead to persevering with to companion with the Administration and to spend money on America.”

The decision comes after the Department of Justice won two prior antitrust cases against Google – one alleging a monopoly in online search and the other in advertising technology.

But earlier this year, another district judge in Washington presiding over the online search case declined to force Google to spinoff its Chrome browser, a step the justice department had suggested was necessary to end the tech giant’s search monopoly.

Against that backdrop, Tuesday’s ruling against the FTC “does really feel like a change in momentum,” said Rebecca Haw Allensworth, an antitrust law professor at Vanderbilt Law School.

“I feel that is going to affect the chance of extra instances like this being introduced.”

But, Allensworth added, the ruling doesn’t indicate that the government’s efforts to crack down on antitrust behaviour are failing.

“It’s a combined bag,” she said.

Many legal observers say that the FTC case against Meta was challenging from the start.

The case “was all the time a tough one, notably given how shortly now we have seen modifications within the social networking market in recent times,” said Laura Phillips-Sawyer, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law.

Still, she said, the case revealed “a sequence of statements by Zuckerberg on the time of these acquisitions that appeared like a want to squelch a nascent risk to Facebook’s dominance”.

Meta’s legal entanglements aren’t over.

Mr Zuckerberg has been ordered to testify in a landmark trial over the impact of social media on young people.

Last month, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl rejected Meta’s argument that an in-person appearance in January was unnecessary.

Instagram head Adam Mosseri can also be slated to testify on the trial, which stems from accusations that Meta and different social media firms make their apps addictive to younger folks regardless of being conscious of psychological well being dangers.