Meta Wins Antitrust Case, Retains Instagram and WhatsApp
Published 18 November 2025
Highlights
- A US judge ruled that Meta does not hold a monopoly in social media, dismissing the FTC's antitrust claims.
- The FTC's lawsuit aimed to force Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, but the court found insufficient evidence of a monopoly.
- Judge Boasberg highlighted the competitive impact of TikTok and YouTube in the social media landscape.
- Meta's victory contrasts with recent antitrust rulings against Google, marking a shift in regulatory momentum.
- The FTC is considering its options following the decision, which prevents a potential breakup of Meta.
-
Rewritten Article
Meta Wins Antitrust Case, Retains Instagram and WhatsApp
In a significant legal victory, Meta Platforms has successfully defended itself against antitrust allegations, with a US district judge ruling that the company does not hold a monopoly in the social media sector. The decision, delivered by Judge James Boasberg, marks a setback for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which had sought to compel Meta to divest its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
Legal Battle and Ruling
The FTC's lawsuit, initiated in 2020, accused Meta of monopolistic practices through its strategic acquisitions of Instagram in 2012 for $1 billion and WhatsApp in 2014 for $19 billion. However, Judge Boasberg concluded that the FTC failed to demonstrate that Meta currently holds monopoly power, citing the dynamic nature of the social media market. He noted the rise of competitors like TikTok and YouTube, which have reshaped the industry landscape.
"The agency has not carried its burden: Meta holds no monopoly in the relevant market," Judge Boasberg stated, emphasizing the evolving competition that challenges Meta's dominance.
Implications for Meta
The ruling spares Meta from a potential breakup that could have seen Instagram and WhatsApp spun off, a move that would have significantly impacted the company's business model. Meta's Chief Legal Officer, Jennifer Newstead, criticized the FTC's attempt to dismantle what she described as a "great American company."
Meta welcomed the decision, with a spokesperson affirming the company's commitment to innovation and economic growth. "Our products are beneficial for people and businesses and exemplify American innovation," the spokesperson said.
Broader Antitrust Context
This ruling comes amid a broader regulatory crackdown on tech giants, with recent antitrust cases against Google highlighting the US government's efforts to address monopolistic practices. Unlike the rulings against Google, which found the company guilty of monopolistic behavior in search and advertising, Meta's victory suggests a shift in regulatory momentum.
The FTC expressed disappointment with the outcome and is currently reviewing its options, including a potential appeal. Joe Simonson, the FTC's Director of Public Affairs, remarked on the challenges faced in the case, noting previous clashes between Judge Boasberg and the Trump administration.
-
Scenario Analysis
The ruling in favor of Meta could influence future antitrust cases involving tech giants, potentially setting a precedent for how courts assess market competition in rapidly evolving industries. Legal experts suggest that the decision may encourage other tech companies to challenge regulatory actions, citing the dynamic nature of digital markets.
For the FTC, the decision represents a critical juncture in its efforts to regulate major tech firms. The agency may need to reassess its strategies and consider new approaches to address anticompetitive practices effectively. As the landscape continues to evolve, the FTC's next steps could shape the future of antitrust enforcement in the tech sector.
In a significant legal victory, Meta Platforms has successfully defended itself against antitrust allegations, with a US district judge ruling that the company does not hold a monopoly in the social media sector. The decision, delivered by Judge James Boasberg, marks a setback for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which had sought to compel Meta to divest its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
Legal Battle and Ruling
The FTC's lawsuit, initiated in 2020, accused Meta of monopolistic practices through its strategic acquisitions of Instagram in 2012 for $1 billion and WhatsApp in 2014 for $19 billion. However, Judge Boasberg concluded that the FTC failed to demonstrate that Meta currently holds monopoly power, citing the dynamic nature of the social media market. He noted the rise of competitors like TikTok and YouTube, which have reshaped the industry landscape.
"The agency has not carried its burden: Meta holds no monopoly in the relevant market," Judge Boasberg stated, emphasizing the evolving competition that challenges Meta's dominance.
Implications for Meta
The ruling spares Meta from a potential breakup that could have seen Instagram and WhatsApp spun off, a move that would have significantly impacted the company's business model. Meta's Chief Legal Officer, Jennifer Newstead, criticized the FTC's attempt to dismantle what she described as a "great American company."
Meta welcomed the decision, with a spokesperson affirming the company's commitment to innovation and economic growth. "Our products are beneficial for people and businesses and exemplify American innovation," the spokesperson said.
Broader Antitrust Context
This ruling comes amid a broader regulatory crackdown on tech giants, with recent antitrust cases against Google highlighting the US government's efforts to address monopolistic practices. Unlike the rulings against Google, which found the company guilty of monopolistic behavior in search and advertising, Meta's victory suggests a shift in regulatory momentum.
The FTC expressed disappointment with the outcome and is currently reviewing its options, including a potential appeal. Joe Simonson, the FTC's Director of Public Affairs, remarked on the challenges faced in the case, noting previous clashes between Judge Boasberg and the Trump administration.
What this might mean
The ruling in favor of Meta could influence future antitrust cases involving tech giants, potentially setting a precedent for how courts assess market competition in rapidly evolving industries. Legal experts suggest that the decision may encourage other tech companies to challenge regulatory actions, citing the dynamic nature of digital markets.
For the FTC, the decision represents a critical juncture in its efforts to regulate major tech firms. The agency may need to reassess its strategies and consider new approaches to address anticompetitive practices effectively. As the landscape continues to evolve, the FTC's next steps could shape the future of antitrust enforcement in the tech sector.
