META Wins Antitrust Case

Meta has secured a decisive victory in one of the most significant US antitrust cases in years, after a federal judge rejected the Federal Trade Commission’s attempt to force the break-up of the social media group. The ruling spares Meta from a potential order to unwind its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, two deals that helped define the modern social media landscape.

Judge James Boasberg, delivering his judgment on Tuesday, said the FTC had failed to prove that Meta currently holds monopoly power in personal social networking. The agency had argued that Meta pursued a buy-or-bury strategy designed to eliminate rivals before they could threaten Facebook’s position. But the judge found that the evidence did not support the claim that Meta still dominates the sector to such an extent that the acquisitions should be reversed.

The FTC had sought a remedy that would have reshaped the company, arguing that Meta bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to suppress emerging competitors. Regulators described the deals as part of a long-term campaign to protect Facebook’s dominance at a time when user behaviour was shifting towards mobile devices and image-led communication. Meta countered that both platforms helped broaden its offering and that users now engage across a far wider range of services, often switching between apps owned by different companies.

The case was launched in 2020 during Donald Trump’s first administration. After an initial setback, the FTC refiled the complaint in 2021, following a reorganisation under President Joe Biden. The agency’s refreshed case sought to frame Meta as the central gatekeeper of personal social networking. It defined the relevant market in narrow terms, focusing primarily on social platforms that help users share experiences with friends and family.

The court rejected that definition, agreeing with Meta that services such as TikTok and YouTube now compete directly with Facebook and Instagram. Boasberg noted that TikTok’s rapid expansion since 2018 had materially changed the competitive landscape. He wrote that the sector has undergone what he called a tectonic transformation, with the main platforms converging on similar features. Video feeds, short-form content and direct messaging now dominate user engagement, blurring the lines between platforms once viewed as distinct.

The judgement is a substantial blow to the FTC’s broader campaign to curb the influence of the largest technology groups. The agency has sought to test the outer limits of US antitrust law, arguing that the structure of digital markets allows a handful of companies to cement their positions through acquisitions and control of user data. But courts have repeatedly pushed back, emphasising traditional competition metrics such as market share, proven consumer harm and evidence of ongoing monopoly power.

The FTC expressed sharp disappointment with the latest outcome. It said it was reviewing all options in light of the decision and criticised the judge, saying the deck was always stacked against the agency. It also highlighted that Boasberg is currently the subject of impeachment efforts led by Republican lawmakers who have objected to several of his rulings, including decisions involving the Trump administration’s deportation policies. Boasberg did not respond to a request for comment.

The regulator’s frustration reflects the difficulty of unravelling decade-old acquisitions that were approved by the government at the time. Private sector analysts warned throughout the case that forcing the break-up of WhatsApp and Instagram would have required a court to set a new and untested standard for retrospective enforcement. Even during settlement discussions before the trial, the gap between the sides was large. The FTC had demanded a settlement worth about 30 billion dollars, while Meta’s opening offer was 450 million dollars, later increased to one billion dollars.

Meta welcomed the ruling, saying it recognised that the company faces fierce competition in social media. It added that it looks forward to continuing to work with the administration while investing across the United States.

The decision follows another setback for US regulators in September, when a separate court declined to order Google to sell the Chrome browser despite finding it had maintained a monopoly in digital advertising. These outcomes suggest regulators may struggle to use existing antitrust tools to force structural changes in the technology sector.

The FTC under Biden has tried to take a more assertive stance on mergers and perceived abuses of market power, reflecting concerns in Washington about the influence of the largest platforms over public debate, digital advertising and user data. But the courts have shown reluctance to endorse the more expansive interpretations of competition law that the agency has advanced.

For Meta, the judgment removes the most serious legal threat it has faced in the United States. It also provides stronger footing for the company as it continues to invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, messaging services and virtual reality. However, the ruling is unlikely to end scrutiny of large technology firms. Lawmakers from both major political parties continue to explore new legislation covering data use, content moderation and platform governance.

The case marks a key moment in the US debate over how to regulate digital markets. While the FTC has signalled that it remains committed to addressing what it sees as entrenched dominance among technology groups, this ruling shows that courts still expect clear, quantifiable evidence of monopoly power before imposing sweeping remedies. For now, Meta has strengthened its position, but the broader contest between regulators and Silicon Valley is far from over.