Meta Platforms Inc. won a decisive legal victory over federal regulators after a federal judge ruled Tuesday that the company does not illegally monopolize social networking. The decision lets Facebook’s parent company retain control of Instagram and WhatsApp.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s decision, which concludes a high-stakes antitrust trial that ended in May, rejected the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) efforts to prove Meta maintains monopoly power in social media. The decision comes as Big Tech faces regulatory pressure, following recent rulings that found Google operated illegal monopolies in both search and online advertising.
The FTC’s case centered on Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s alleged acquisition strategy, summarized in a 2008 statement that it’s “better to buy than compete.” Regulators argued Meta systematically tracked potential rivals and acquired companies perceived as competitive threats, specifically targeting Instagram and WhatsApp to neutralize emerging competition.
During April testimony, Zuckerberg defended the Instagram acquisition against claims it was designed to eliminate a rival.
FTC attorney Daniel Matheson confronted him with decade-old emails written by Zuckerberg and associates surrounding the purchase. While acknowledging the documents, Zuckerberg maintained they represented early-stage thinking that didn’t capture his complete rationale for the acquisition.
Judge Boasberg’s ruling hinged on a critical distinction. The case wasn’t about whether those decade-old acquisitions — which the FTC approved at the time — were anticompetitive, but whether Meta holds monopoly power today. The FTC could only succeed by proving “current or imminent legal violation,” he wrote.
The judge found regulators failed to meet that burden. “The FTC continues to insist that Meta competes with the same old rivals it has for the last decade, that the company holds a monopoly among that small set, and that it maintained that monopoly through anticompetitive acquisitions,” Boasberg wrote. “Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now.”
The FTC also alleged Meta enacted policies making it difficult for smaller competitors to enter the market and neutralize threats, particularly as consumer attention shifted from desktop computers to mobile devices.
Meta welcomed the decision, saying it “recognizes that Meta faces fierce competition.”
Judge Boasberg emphasized how dramatically the social media landscape has transformed since the FTC filed suit in 2020. Two earlier opinions dismissing the case in 2021 and 2022 didn’t even mention TikTok — now what the judge called Meta’s “fiercest rival” holding “center stage” in the competitive arena.
Invoking Greek philosopher Heraclitus’s observation that no one steps in the same river twice, Boasberg applied the metaphor to social media’s fluid nature. “The landscape that existed only five years ago when the Federal Trade Commission brought this antitrust suit has changed markedly,” he wrote, noting that distinctions between social networking and social media apps have dissolved.
The ruling represents a significant setback for the FTC’s aggressive approach to Big Tech regulation and allows Meta to maintain its current corporate structure without forced divestitures, according to legal experts.
“The decision also may have broader implications for U.S. antitrust suits brought against high tech digital platforms, particularly since it notes how tech markets have changed significantly in different years, making restrictive market definitions, such as the one put forth by the FTC here, hard to defend,” Alden Abbott, former FTC general counsel, said in an email. The decision also notes the role of AI in changing market contours – “the landscape that existed only five years ago when the Federal Trade Commission brought this antitrust suit has changed markedly.”
