Meta has won a critical antitrust battle with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, avoiding a forced breakup of Instagram and WhatsApp. Judge James Boasberg ruled that Meta does not currently hold monopoly power in social networking, highlighting the evolving and competitive nature of the social media market.

Court Ruling Undermines FTC Monopoly Claims

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued the ruling after a high-profile trial that concluded in May. The decision contrasts sharply with previous antitrust rulings against Google, which determined illegal monopolies in search and online advertising, signaling a nuanced approach by U.S. courts toward technology giants.

In his ruling, Boasberg wrote that while Meta may have held monopoly power in the past, the FTC had not proven it maintains such power today. “Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now,” he stated, emphasizing that the case required proof of current or imminent legal violations.

FTC Allegations and Zuckerberg Testimony

The FTC argued that Meta maintained dominance by acquiring potential rivals, citing CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s 2008 remark: “It is better to buy than compete.” Investigators suggested these acquisitions, including Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014, were aimed at neutralizing threats to Facebook’s growth.

During trial testimony, Zuckerberg addressed the claims, noting that early acquisition emails cited by the FTC did not capture the full context of his interest in these companies. “The case is about whether Meta holds a monopoly now, not historical acquisitions,” Boasberg wrote in his decision.

Meta Emphasizes Competition and Innovation

Meta responded to the ruling by emphasizing the competitive environment of social networking. Jennifer Newstead, the company’s chief legal officer, said the decision acknowledges that Meta “faces fierce competition” while highlighting the company’s contributions to American innovation and economic growth.

The social media landscape has shifted considerably since the FTC filed the lawsuit in 2020. Platforms like TikTok have emerged as dominant rivals, changing the definition of competition in social media. Boasberg referenced Greek philosopher Heraclitus, noting that “no man can ever step into the same river twice,” drawing a parallel to the constantly evolving digital ecosystem.

Industry and Regulatory Perspectives

Analysts viewed the ruling as a significant, though not definitive, victory for Meta. Minda Smiley, an Emarketer analyst, noted that while Meta’s win reflects its efforts to compete with TikTok, broader regulatory scrutiny remains. Future trials may focus on issues such as children’s mental health and AI spending by major social platforms.

“This decision is a boost for Meta as it faces criticism over platform safety and its investment in artificial intelligence,” Smiley added, highlighting ongoing challenges in tech regulation.

Background on Instagram and WhatsApp Acquisitions

Facebook acquired Instagram in 2012 for $1 billion in cash and stock, a significant deal at the time for the then-small photo-sharing app. WhatsApp was purchased in 2014 for $22 billion, helping Facebook expand its mobile presence and appeal to younger demographics.

Both acquisitions were approved at the time by the FTC. Instagram and WhatsApp allowed Facebook to pivot from desktop-centric social networking to mobile platforms, remaining competitive against emerging rivals such as Snapchat and TikTok. The FTC’s lawsuit, filed eight years later, narrowly defined Meta’s market, excluding key competitors in its analysis.

Market Reaction and Investor Sentiment

Shares of Meta, based in Menlo Park, California, showed minimal market movement after the ruling. Trading reflected broader market trends rather than a reaction to the verdict, with shares declining slightly by $1.52 to $600.49. Investors appeared to view the ruling as largely in line with expectations, providing regulatory clarity without significantly altering the company’s strategic outlook.

Conclusion: Implications for Tech Regulation

Meta’s victory underscores the challenges of defining monopolistic behavior in dynamic digital markets. Judge Boasberg’s decision reinforces the principle that antitrust enforcement must consider current market conditions and emerging competitors.

While the ruling secures Instagram and WhatsApp under Meta’s ownership for now, regulatory scrutiny of large technology companies continues. Future cases may focus on evolving issues, including AI investment, platform safety, and competition with emerging social media services.

Source: AP News – Meta prevails in historic FTC antitrust case, won’t have to break off WhatsApp, Instagram

The post Meta Wins Historic FTC Antitrust Case, Instagram and WhatsApp Remain Intact appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Published Time: 08-12-2025, 13:20

SAN FRANCISCO — Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk says he intends to sue Apple, alleging the company has deliberately excluded his social media platform X and artificial intelligence chatbot Grok from its top-recommended apps in the App Store.

Musk, who owns SpaceX, Tesla, and X (formerly Twitter), voiced his frustration late Monday in a series of posts on X, calling Apple’s omission a “clear antitrust violation.” He accused the tech giant of favoring certain AI companies, particularly OpenAI, while sidelining competitors like his own AI startup, xAI.

Musk’s Public Accusations

In his online statement, Musk addressed Apple directly, writing:

“Hey @Apple App Store, why do you refuse to put either X or Grok in your ‘Must Have’ section when X is the #1 news app in the world and Grok is #5 among all apps? Are you playing politics? What gives? Inquiring minds want to know.”

Musk alleged that Apple’s App Store environment makes it “impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1,” which he labeled “an unequivocal antitrust violation.” He added that his AI venture, xAI, will pursue “immediate legal action,” though he did not provide details about the legal strategy or filing timeline.

Grok, developed by Musk’s company xAI, has positioned itself as a conversational AI alternative to ChatGPT. Despite its growing user base, Musk claims it is being deliberately excluded from Apple’s most visible app promotions.

Apple Yet to Respond

As of Tuesday morning, Apple had not publicly commented on Musk’s claims. The company has faced multiple antitrust investigations in recent years, particularly over its App Store policies.

In April, the European Union fined Apple €500 million (approximately $545 million) for restricting app developers from directing users to more affordable payment options outside the App Store. The EU also fined the company nearly $2 billion in 2024 for allegedly favoring its own music streaming service over competitors like Spotify.

In the United States, a federal judge recently ruled that Apple violated an existing court injunction in an antitrust lawsuit brought by Fortnite maker Epic Games. That case centered on Apple’s control over app distribution and in-app payments.

Current App Store Rankings

According to Apple’s App Store data as of early Tuesday, the top-ranked app was TikTok, followed by Tinder, Duolingo, YouTube, and Bumble. OpenAI’s ChatGPT held the number seven spot.

Musk argued that the exclusion of X and Grok from the “Must Have” section is particularly striking given their reported popularity. X is currently ranked as the number one news app globally, and Grok is ranked fifth overall among all apps, according to Musk.

Broader Antitrust Context

Musk’s dispute with Apple adds to a growing list of high-profile tensions between tech giants and regulators over digital marketplaces. Antitrust authorities worldwide have intensified scrutiny over whether app store operators use their market dominance to unfairly promote certain products or block competitors.

Apple has consistently defended its App Store curation process, arguing that its editorial selections aim to highlight apps that deliver the best user experience, adhere to privacy standards, and maintain security protocols.

If Musk proceeds with legal action, the case could add another layer to the ongoing global debate over platform neutrality and competition in the app economy.

What’s Next for Musk’s Legal Threat

It remains unclear whether Musk’s legal team will pursue action in U.S. courts, in the European Union, or in multiple jurisdictions. Given Apple’s history of defending its App Store policies and prevailing in certain high-profile cases, any lawsuit from Musk could face significant legal hurdles.

For now, Musk’s public challenge is drawing attention from both the tech industry and policymakers. Observers note that his high-profile ownership of several global companies and his direct communication style often lead to rapid escalation of disputes.

While Apple has not responded, the public debate sparked by Musk’s comments is likely to continue, especially as regulators worldwide weigh in on how app stores should manage rankings, recommendations, and competition.

Source: AP News – Musk says he plans to sue Apple for not featuring X or Grok among its top apps

The post Elon Musk Threatens Legal Action Against Apple Over App Store Rankings appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg once considered separating Instagram from Facebook due to fears over potential antitrust litigation, according to an email presented in court on the second day of the ongoing antitrust trial.

In the 2018 email, Zuckerberg expressed concerns about the growing scrutiny on big tech companies. He suggested that spinning Instagram out of Meta might be the only way to meet the company’s goals in a rapidly evolving market. He also mentioned that Meta could be forced to separate Instagram and WhatsApp in the future if regulatory pressure intensified.

“There is a non-trivial chance that we could be forced to spin Instagram out and perhaps WhatsApp in the next five to 10 years,” Zuckerberg wrote.

This revelation came during the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) trial, where Meta faces allegations of illegally monopolizing the social media market by acquiring competitors like Instagram and WhatsApp. The trial could potentially force Meta to break off these two platforms, which it bought over a decade ago for $1 billion and $22 billion, respectively.

Zuckerberg, the first witness in the trial, spent more than seven hours on the stand over two days. The emails in question were related to discussions on whether Meta should buy Instagram and what impact the acquisition would have on competition in the market.

Throughout his testimony, Zuckerberg faced tough questioning about Meta’s acquisition of Instagram. Daniel Matheson, the attorney leading the case for the FTC, pointed out that Zuckerberg had referred to Instagram as a “rapidly growing, threatening network.” Matheson also raised the point that Zuckerberg’s goal in acquiring Instagram might have been to neutralize a competitor.

However, Zuckerberg defended his decision, saying that Meta wasn’t just trying to squash competition. Instead, he explained that Facebook was in the process of building its own mobile camera app, but Instagram was already excelling in that area.

“I wanted to buy them because they were better at it,” Zuckerberg said, rejecting the idea that the purchase was solely about eliminating a rival.

Matheson brought up emails written by Zuckerberg and his associates dating back to the time before and after Instagram’s acquisition. One email from 2012 mentioned that Instagram and another startup, Path, were developing networks that could be “very disruptive” to Facebook’s business. Zuckerberg explained that the email was part of a larger conversation about whether to buy companies to accelerate Facebook’s growth.

Despite acknowledging the contents of these documents, Zuckerberg downplayed their significance, suggesting that they didn’t fully capture the broader strategic reasons behind Meta’s purchases.

Later in the day, Meta’s attorney, Mark Hansen, began his questioning, emphasizing that Meta’s services are free and that the company faces significant competition. He argued that charging for services like Facebook would drive users away, as alternatives are readily available.

Zuckerberg echoed this point, asserting that Meta operates in a highly competitive environment. The trial is one of the first major tests of the FTC’s power under President Donald Trump to challenge the dominance of big tech companies.

The FTC’s lawsuit, filed in 2020, alleges that Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were part of a strategy to crush competition and establish a monopoly in the social media market. The FTC has a narrow view of Meta’s competitors, focusing on platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp, while excluding major rivals like TikTok, YouTube, and Apple’s messaging service.

As the case moves forward, it could have significant consequences for the future of Meta and the broader tech industry. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who is overseeing the case, already denied Meta’s request for summary judgment, meaning the case will go to trial. The outcome could shape the future of tech acquisitions and antitrust regulations for years to come.

Source: AP News – Meta CEO Zuckerberg considered spinning off Instagram in 2018 over antitrust worries, email says

The post Zuckerberg Considered Spinning Off Instagram Over Antitrust Concerns appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

In a 23-page document filed on Wednesday, the Justice Department proposed that Google sell its leading Chrome web browser and restrict its Android operating system to prevent it from unfairly promoting its search engine. The recommended breakup and changes come in the wake of a ruling by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in August, which deemed Google a monopolist.

The push for these drastic measures highlights the seriousness with which the Biden administration’s regulators are treating the issue. However, the case could face changes under the next administration, with President-elect Donald Trump potentially appointing officials who may be less aggressive in their approach. Court hearings for Google’s penalty are set to begin in April, with Judge Mehta aiming to make a final ruling before Labor Day.

If Mehta agrees to the Justice Department’s recommendations, Google is almost certain to appeal, which would likely delay the case further. The proposed penalties include a spinoff of Google’s Chrome browser and further restrictions on its Android software, as well as a ban on deals that make Google’s search engine the default on Apple’s iPhones and other devices.

Additionally, regulators are calling for Google to share data it collects from users’ search queries with competitors, allowing them a better chance to compete. These moves could disrupt Google’s $300 billion business, which has contributed significantly to the profits of its parent company, Alphabet Inc.

The Justice Department argues that Google’s actions have created an unfair advantage that has skewed the playing field, with the company benefiting from illegal gains. “The remedy must close this gap and deprive Google of these advantages,” the department said in its filing.

There’s still a possibility that the Justice Department could scale back its efforts, particularly if Trump replaces Jonathan Kanter, who was appointed by Biden to head the antitrust division. Although the case was originally filed during Trump’s first term, Kanter has overseen the trial and led the charge against Big Tech, including cases against companies like Apple. Trump has expressed concerns that breaking up Google could harm the company, but he has not offered an alternative plan.

The recent filing marks the Justice Department’s final chance to propose measures needed to restore competition in the search industry. It follows an earlier outline of potential penalties and has raised questions about whether the proposed breakup extends beyond the scope of the original trial and Mehta’s ruling.

One key issue addressed in Mehta’s decision was Google’s multibillion-dollar deals to keep its search engine as the default option on major platforms, like Apple’s iPhone. The Justice Department has proposed measures to stop these deals, which Google spends more than $26 billion annually to maintain.

However, it remains uncertain whether Judge Mehta will accept the idea of separating Chrome from Google or unbundling Android from the company’s other services. Some experts have compared this case to Microsoft’s antitrust case from 25 years ago, in which a court initially ordered a breakup of the company for using its Windows operating system to suppress competition. However, that decision was overturned on appeal, and experts believe that precedent could influence Mehta’s approach to the Google case.

Source

The post Justice Department Moves to Break Up Google, Calls for Sale of Chrome appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.