After a lengthy legal battle in the United States, a federal court in Washington has dismissed the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) antitrust case against Meta. Judge James Boasberg concluded that, as of today, the company does not exercise monopoly power in the social media market.
The process, open to review purchases of Instagram (2012) and WhatsApp (2014)The lawsuit sought to force Meta to divest itself of these platforms. The verdict understands that the competition from TikTok and YouTube is enough to prevent exclusive dominance in an ecosystem that has changed remarkably in just a few years.
What the court has decided
Judge Boasberg argues that the FTC should have proven that Meta maintains today a monopolistic power, not just that it may have had it in the past. In the court's opinion, the agency has not proven this. The relevant market cannot artificially exclude video and algorithmic recommendation platforms like TikTok and YouTube, because users use them as direct substitutes from Facebook and Instagram.
The car highlights the transformation of the sector: the most used part of Meta's apps —such as Reels— it increasingly resembles the content offered by TikTok and YouTube. This convergence has blurred the old category of “personal social media,” based on posts for friends and family, which the FTC tried to defend in its case framework.
The opposing arguments
The FTC defined a narrow market of “personal social networking” in which, according to its thesis, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and MeWe competed, while TikTok and YouTube would be considered platforms of entertainment in another space. The court disagrees: when evaluating the actual behavior of users, it observes that migrant among these services according to the availability of functions and content.
Useful empirical evidence was presented during the trial. Among them were changes in usage when TikTok was Inaccessible or when Facebook and Instagram experienced outages, as well as experiments measuring which apps the freed-up time migrated to. The pattern was clear: the main replacements for Meta are TikTok and YouTubeahead of other more traditional networks.
The ruling also cites consumption metrics: Americans now spend a reduced portion of their time watching content from friends (around 17% on Facebook y 7% on Instagram), while the rest focus on short videos and algorithmic recommendations, bringing Meta's experience closer to that of its rivals.
Instagram and WhatsApp: FTC's failed target
The agency intended for the court to order a separation of Instagram and WhatsApp, understanding that they were acquisitions made to neutralize competitive threats. The judge does not share that conclusion for the current context and recalls that, at the time, the regulators they didn't block said operations.
The file contained internal messages—such as the famous phrase attributed to Mark Zuckerberg that “it’s better to buy than to compete”—and allegations about supposed exclusion policies of rivals. However, the court gives more weight to contemporary competitive dynamics and the evidence that Meta competes with actors whose for Growth It has been dazzling.
Facts that weighed on the ruling
- App usage substitution: When TikTok was inaccessible in certain markets, time spent on Facebook and Instagram increased significantly; when Meta's services went down, traffic was diverted mainly to TikTok and YouTube.
- Product evolution: Meta invested billions in Reels to stem the flow of users towards short videos, with features increasingly similar to its competitors.
- Consumption data: Content from friends and family weighs less; the algorithmic video feed is gaining ground. virtually indistinguishable from TikTok and YouTube.
Furthermore, the judge notes that if the relevant market includes Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, MeWe, TikTok, and YouTube, Meta's share based on usage time would be insufficient to maintain a monopoly according to the thresholds that are usually considered by US courts.
Reactions and next steps
Meta described the ruling as confirmation that it faces a intense competition and highlighted the benefits of its products for users and businesses. For its part, the FTC expressed its disappointment He indicated that he is analyzing options, which leaves the door open to an appeal.
The seven-week trial included testimony from Mark Zuckerberg, the former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg and executives of rival platforms. Although this outcome favors Meta, the regulatory front in the United States remains active, with significant proceedings underway against other major technology companies.
Implications for Spain and the European Union
The verdict does not alter European supervision, but it fuels the debate on how to address rapidly changing digital markets. In the EU, the following apply: DMA and the DSA, which impose ex ante obligations on large platforms and strengthened control over competition, advertising and moderation practices.
For Spain, where the use of WhatsApp and Instagram is massive, the ruling is a reminder that the competition is not limited to “social networks” in the classic sense: it is about fighting for atención of users among short video formats, messaging, and algorithmic content. This may influence future research and coordination between competition and authorities. Data Protection.
An ecosystem that is no longer the one from 2020
A key part of the legal reasoning is temporal: the market described by the FTC in 2020 is no longer the same. functional convergence —stories, short videos, private messaging— and the speed with which users migrate from one platform to another make it difficult to establish clear boundaries for a classic monopoly analysis.
The court acknowledges that Meta may have enjoyed more power in the past, but focuses on whether it can do so today. control prices or exclude sustained competition. With the weight of TikTok and YouTube, and the relative decline in time spent watching content from friends, that conclusion does not hold up in the terms proposed by the FTC.
What lies ahead
The ruling is a milestone in a broader offensive by US authorities against Big Tech. At the same time, there are other significant decisions and cases affecting... Google, Apple y Amazonand new processes are anticipated regarding the impact on minors of social networks.
For Meta, the victory eliminates a risk of forced divestment and reinforces its argument that it competes in open and changing markets. For regulators, the question is how to design cases that more accurately capture an environment where functions and formats converge at high speed.
The report makes it clear that, in the current state of the market, Meta does not maintain a monopoly of social media; the rise of short videos and recommendation systems has shifted the competitive focus. The FTC can appeal, and in Europe platforms will continue to be scrutinized under their own rules, but the current picture is of a sector with several players capable of discipline the power of Meta.