Mark Zuckerberg in the face of American justice. The image marks a turning point: the founder of Facebook, now at the head of Meta, faced with one of the most important antitrust procedures of the last decade. At stake, the future of its group, but also that of the model of expansion by acquisition which structured the growth of large technological companies.
A frontal trial against the acquisition strategy
Before the Federal Court of the District of Columbia, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) accuses Meta of having consolidated an illegal monopoly in social networks. The argument is clear: Instagram and WhatsApp’s acquisitions were used to neutralize potential competitors, even before they reach their maturity. The FTC seeks to demonstrate that it was not integrations of complementarity, but a strategic locking of the market.
On the witness bench, Zuckerberg had to comment on several internal exchanges highlighting the rapid ascent of Instagram and the difficulties of Facebook to keep pace, especially on mobile. The acquisition appears, in certain documents, as a defensive response.
Attempts to settle and rupture assumed
According to several sources, Meta tried to settle the dispute outside court, offering up to $ 1 billion to end the procedure. The FTC would have refused, demanding 30 billion. The message is clear: the agency does not want a simple check, but a strong signal.
This refusal refuses an assumed will to break with the logic of past accommodation. By refusing to compromise, the FTC seeks to create a precedent capable of redefining the rules of the game for the entire industry.
A trial that goes beyond the Meta case
If the FTC obtains their case, it could demand the resale of Instagram and WhatsApp, an unprecedented decision for decades. This scenario would have heavy consequences for Silicon Valley. For 20 years, the repurchase of promising start-up has been a central lever for defensive growth and innovation for large platforms. Such jurisprudence would weaken this mechanics.
This trial could thus call into question the principle according to which a dominant company can extend its grip by acquiring emerging entities. He would also ask the question of the reopening of the a posteriori validated mergers, hitherto considered politically and legally risky.
Defining the market in debate
One of the key battles of the trial concerns the definition of the market. The FTC defends a narrow vision centered on personal social media platforms, where Meta advances a wider reading, encompassing Tiktok, YouTube, Linkedin or even messaging and video services. The outcome will partly depend on the judge’s ability to decide between these competing approaches, and to determine whether META has unduly consolidated market power.
Mutation antitrust doctrine
The Meta trial is part of a broader dynamic of tightening the regulation of large digital platforms. After Google and Amazon, the FTC and the Department of Justice multiply actions against digital giants, in a logic now Bipartisane.
This paradigm change marks the end of an era: that where the extent of the platforms justified their strategic freedom. From now on, their growth is subject to a structural examination, which only exceeds price or innovation effects.
Three scenarios, the same breakup
Three main outcomes are looming:
-
- If Meta prevails, the FTC comes out weakened and the Big Tech comforted.
- If a financial sanction is pronounced without dismantling, the signal remains dissuasive, but without structural effect.
- If the resale of assets is ordered, this will mark a historic turning point in digital governance.
In all cases, the trial raises an essential question: is the growth by acquisition still legitimate when it concerns structuring platforms for the global digital economy? The verdict expected in the coming months could redraw the Big Tech power card
