Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is facing its most serious legal challenge yet — one that could force it to sell Instagram and WhatsApp. The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has launched a major antitrust case against Meta, accusing it of buying rivals to kill off competition and build a social media monopoly.
This case, years in the making, has now gone to trial. Meta’s chief, Mark Zuckerberg, has taken the stand, defending the company’s acquisitions and strategy.
When did it all start?
Back in 2020, the FTC sued Meta (then known as Facebook), arguing that it had illegally maintained monopoly power by acquiring competitors before they could grow.
Two deals were at the centre of the case: Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram for $1 billion in 2012, and WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014.
Although the FTC had approved both deals at the time, it later reversed its stance, saying the purchases were part of a pattern. The agency claims Meta’s leadership, including Zuckerberg, identified both companies as competitive threats and moved quickly to “neutralise” them rather than compete on merit.
Internal emails from that period, including one in which Zuckerberg noted Instagram’s fast growth and another referencing WhatsApp’s popularity, have become crucial pieces of evidence.
What is the FTC arguing?
According to the FTC, Meta used a “buy-or-bury” strategy — acquiring promising rivals to protect its dominance, instead of improving its own products. In opening arguments, FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson said the company had “broken the deal” that underpins American competition policy: that firms should win based on performance, not by eliminating rivals through takeovers.
The FTC says Meta’s actions have deprived consumers of better products and more choices. By merging Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp under one umbrella, the company reduced innovation in the broader social networking space, the agency claims.
The case is being tried under Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits companies from maintaining monopolies through anticompetitive means.
What does Meta say in response?
Meta has strongly denied the allegations. Its lawyers argue that the FTC approved the Instagram and WhatsApp deals more than a decade ago, and trying to undo them now is both legally shaky and bad for business.
They also claim the company faces intense competition from other platforms, such as TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat and LinkedIn, and cannot be considered a monopoly.
Zuckerberg, testifying in court, said Meta had invested heavily in Instagram and WhatsApp after acquiring them. He described the early conversations about those deals as exploratory rather than aggressive efforts to crush competition. Meta’s lead litigator, Mark Hansen, dismissed the FTC’s case as “a grab bag of theories at war with the facts and the law”.
Meta is also pushing back on how the FTC defines the market. The agency argues that Meta has dominated social networking since 2011, but Meta insists the market is much broader — including messaging apps and video platforms — and that it remains one player among many.
Why is this trial important?
This is the most serious legal threat Meta has faced in years. If the government wins, it is likely to ask the court to force Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp. Such a move would mark a dramatic shift in how regulators approach tech mergers and could limit the ability of large companies to acquire startups in future.
This case, years in the making, has now gone to trial. Meta’s chief, Mark Zuckerberg, has taken the stand, defending the company’s acquisitions and strategy.
When did it all start?
Back in 2020, the FTC sued Meta (then known as Facebook), arguing that it had illegally maintained monopoly power by acquiring competitors before they could grow.
Two deals were at the centre of the case: Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram for $1 billion in 2012, and WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014.
Although the FTC had approved both deals at the time, it later reversed its stance, saying the purchases were part of a pattern. The agency claims Meta’s leadership, including Zuckerberg, identified both companies as competitive threats and moved quickly to “neutralise” them rather than compete on merit.
Internal emails from that period, including one in which Zuckerberg noted Instagram’s fast growth and another referencing WhatsApp’s popularity, have become crucial pieces of evidence.
What is the FTC arguing?
According to the FTC, Meta used a “buy-or-bury” strategy — acquiring promising rivals to protect its dominance, instead of improving its own products. In opening arguments, FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson said the company had “broken the deal” that underpins American competition policy: that firms should win based on performance, not by eliminating rivals through takeovers.
The FTC says Meta’s actions have deprived consumers of better products and more choices. By merging Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp under one umbrella, the company reduced innovation in the broader social networking space, the agency claims.
The case is being tried under Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits companies from maintaining monopolies through anticompetitive means.
What does Meta say in response?
Meta has strongly denied the allegations. Its lawyers argue that the FTC approved the Instagram and WhatsApp deals more than a decade ago, and trying to undo them now is both legally shaky and bad for business.
They also claim the company faces intense competition from other platforms, such as TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat and LinkedIn, and cannot be considered a monopoly.
Zuckerberg, testifying in court, said Meta had invested heavily in Instagram and WhatsApp after acquiring them. He described the early conversations about those deals as exploratory rather than aggressive efforts to crush competition. Meta’s lead litigator, Mark Hansen, dismissed the FTC’s case as “a grab bag of theories at war with the facts and the law”.
Meta is also pushing back on how the FTC defines the market. The agency argues that Meta has dominated social networking since 2011, but Meta insists the market is much broader — including messaging apps and video platforms — and that it remains one player among many.
Why is this trial important?
This is the most serious legal threat Meta has faced in years. If the government wins, it is likely to ask the court to force Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp. Such a move would mark a dramatic shift in how regulators approach tech mergers and could limit the ability of large companies to acquire startups in future.
You may also like
'Poisonous campaign': Telangana CM Reddy snubs 'forest razing' charge
India's total exports touch record $820.93 billion in 2024-25 despite global challenges
Celebrity Big Brother prepares to unleash brutal twist on unsuspecting housemates
Important Tips to Use a Beauty Blender for Perfect Makeup
SP leaders spark row on Ghori, Babur's DNA; BJP and Congress criticise
