On Monday, Meta will face the Federal Trade Commission in a legal battle that can renew the social media scenario.
Over the next two months, the US government will present its case that the company’s Instagram’s 2012 acquisition and the WhatsApp acquisition of 2014 pose a potential threat to its domination. Meta, which was then called Facebook, will defend itself from the debate that it has helped these acquisitions increase the business through billions of people, while facing considerable competition along the way. The company’s senior executives, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former COO Sheryl Sandberg, are expected to testify during the trial in Washington DC.
It has been a long time in the trial. This is based on the case filed under the First Trump administration and is then amended under the Biden administration, in which the major integration of the meta has been dramatically resolved. This is the third US case that has been trying to increase the Big Tech in two years after a successful decision on the Google’s search business and its decision against its advertisement business against its advertisement business. It begins between a wide -ranging aspect of how anti -trust rules should apply to the digital markets, which began years ago and have turned into a two -way, popular movement. But under Trump’s new government, what seems to be somewhat in the air – Trump’s FTC chair calls itself hard on the Big Tech, though an important part of his focus is in the conservative accounts of the web platforms.
Before the trial, Meta has tried to harmonize according to the Trump administration. Zuckerberg was sitting with another tech CEO on the dice during the inauguration of President Donald Trump. Immediately after the January 6 uprising, Meta set a lawsuit to ban the president on his account. –
Meanwhile, in recent weeks, Zuckerberg is personally Favored Trump To quit the FTC case. The agency chair, Andrew Ferguson, recently suggested that he would comply with Trump’s order. So far, the matter is still ready for the trial on April 14. This phase of this case will help the judge determine whether Meta has violated the law of no -confidence, and if she rules against the company, it will be a separate test to determine how to deal with the alleged damage, which is likely to be broken by the company.
The scope of the FTC case is the allegation that Meta illegally made the market illegally monopolized for “personal social networking services”, which was allegedly used to “neutralize” potential rivals. Judge James Boseberg threw the FTC’s preliminary case against Facebook in mid -2021, adding that the government did not present so many facts to show the power of monopoly. He also threw a parallel complaint brought through a major coalition of the states, saying he could not challenge the closing acquisition – and was cleared by the FTC – so many years ago.
But Boseberg eventually allowed the FTC to refill the modified complaint. He considered it so strong to move most of the government’s latest case, but banned some allegations about Facebook’s platform inter -appliancement policies. Nevertheless, he warned, the FTC “could face a long work under the road to prove his allegations.”
Now, the trial will testify in a long list of current and former Metau executives, including Zuckerberg, Sandburg, CTO Andrew Bose Worth, CMO Alex Schultez, and CPO Chris Cox. The current and former heads of Instagram and WhatsApp are also expected to testify. In addition, the court will also hear the witnesses of rival social media firms like Snap, T -Taktok, and Pennist.
The FTC case is “one of the tech cases that has been brought in the last five years”.
Rebecca Ha Alan Worth, Anti -Trust Professor of Wanderblat Law School believes that the FTC case is “one of the tech cases brought in the last five years.” She states that the power of the FTC case is primarily revealed by the alleged anti -anti -anti -anti -anti -anti -anti -anti -anti -anti -automotive intention. Stuffy.
Of FTC Edited complaints Zuckerberg, pointing to a 2012 message, wrote to his timely CFO about buying social media startups like Instagram: “Businesses are newborn but networks are set, brands are already meaningful and if they grow on a large scale, they can disrupt us a lot.”
When Facebook then paid $ 1 billion for Instagram, the photo -sharing app had only 30 million users and no revenue. Today, Instagram has billions of users and they are Estimated This year, more than half of the Meta’s US advertisement is calculated. Billions of people still use Facebook, but the social network has long been struggling to attract young consumers like Instagram – one of the issues Zuckerberg has said interestingly that it has focused specifically to fix this year.
WhatsApp had 450 million users when Facebook paid $ 19.3 billion-which is the largest startup of the time-it was to buy in 2014. Meta now earns more than $ 10 billion a year from ads on Facebook and Instagram, which people have identified to discuss with business accounts about WhatsApp, Will Keith Cart, recently, a handshake leader, in a handcuff meeting after meeting a hand. Stuffy
For Meta, fighting for forced spin off of Instagram or WhatsApp is important. Instagram, with millions of active creators, is still the company’s culturally related service. WhatsApp estimates is the most used messaging app in the world. Both apps are important levels for distributing their AI assistant, which Zuckerberg views as the next major tech war. And although it allowed both apps to work freely from the rest of the meta, it would now be technically challenging them how deeply the two apps are connected with the company’s wider infrastructure.
For Meta, fighting for forced spin -off of Instagram or WhatsApp is of paramount importance
Although Zuckerberg’s intention behind buying Instagram and WhatsApp cannot be considered legally to break the anti -trust law, Allnce Worth argues that he can act as a tie -breaker if the judge feels the market expert ideas. He says, on the other hand, Meta will potentially find its strong arguments in attacking the market government’s definition. (In recent years, this defense has been a major element of every major anti -trust suit.)
The government will have to prove that Meta has the power to monopoly in the respective market so that it can look for the judge for illegally monopolizing monopoly. The selected definition of FTC’s “personal social networking address” does not exclude services such as LinkedIn, YouTube, and even Tachotok. The meta will also likely create a compulsory case about its role in making Instagram and WhatsApp successful apps.
Nevertheless, the government has the benefit of its own pace. Last year, DC Judge Amit Mehta was found to have illegal monopoly in search of Google online, which paved the way for other negative decisions against Big Tech. (Mehta will soon consider arguments about proper treatment in this case.)
“Finding responsibility in these matters puts the judge a bit of a limbs, because it has been routine for so long as how companies run their business, and especially delay in the form of a bug -tech,” says Alan Worth. “Once a judge goes out to the organs, it becomes a bit easier for another judge.”
