"The FTC first brought its case back in December 2020, alleging "the company is illegally maintaining its personal social networking monopoly through a years-long course of anticompetitive conduct." That "conduct" included snapping up potential rivals such as Instagram and WhatsApp, as well as imposing "anticompetitive conditions on software developers." At the time, the FTC demanded divestitures of assets, including those acquisitions, and removing the "anticompetitive conditions" on devs."
"However last November, district judge James Boasberg ruled that "Meta holds no monopoly in the relevant market," citing a constantly changing social media ecosystem and noted that Meta's market share "seems to be shrinking." He also noted that the FTC had approved the Insta and WhatsApp buys. In a statement yesterday, the FTC confirmed it "continues to allege, and robust evidence at trial demonstrated, that for over a decade Meta has illegally maintained a monopoly in personal social networking services through anticompetitive conduct.""
The Federal Trade Commission has appealed a district court decision that found Meta did not hold a monopoly in personal social networking. The FTC alleges Meta maintained a decade-long monopoly through anticompetitive conduct, including acquiring potential rivals Instagram and WhatsApp and imposing restrictive conditions on software developers. The FTC originally sought divestitures and removal of those conditions. District Judge James Boasberg concluded Meta's market share appears to be shrinking and noted prior FTC approval of the acquisitions. The FTC insists trial evidence showed illegal maintenance of monopoly power and vows to continue litigation to restore competition.
Read at Theregister
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]