Meta prevails in existential challenge as court rules it's not a monopoly

"The Federal Trade Commission 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 in his ruling. Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now. The Court's verdict today determines that the FTC has not done so."

"Meta, the FTC had argued, has maintained a monopoly by pursuing CEO Mark Zuckerberg's strategy, expressed in 2008: It is better to buy than compete.' True to that maxim, Facebook has systematically tracked potential rivals and acquired companies that it viewed as serious competitive threats. During his April testimony, Zuckerberg pushed back against the FTC's contention that Facebook bought Instagram to neutralise a threat."

Judge James Boasberg ruled that Meta does not hold a monopoly in social networking, rejecting the FTC's request to force divestiture of Instagram and WhatsApp. The judge noted the social media landscape changed markedly since the lawsuit began five years earlier and required current proof of monopoly power. The FTC argued Meta maintained monopoly through anticompetitive acquisitions and pursued Zuckerberg's strategy of buying rivals. Meta countered that it faced ongoing competition and Zuckerberg downplayed internal documents about the Instagram acquisition. The court concluded the FTC failed to show Meta presently holds monopoly power.

Read at www.aljazeera.com