The FTC argued that Meta had maintained illegal monopoly power in the narrow sector of the social media market by gobbling up nascent competitors, Instagram and WhatsApp, it feared could threaten its dominance. But throughout the trial, the FTC was dogged by questions about whether it could claim Meta still had that illegal monopoly in the face of a greatly changed social media landscape. Boasberg said the government had to prove current or imminent illegal monopolization, not just past dominance.
Technically, fair on the judge’s part.
I think this is more like Meta winning by delaying the case until it could win on a technicality.
If these arguments had come up when the suit was originally filed, Meta would have lost the case, because TikTok hadn’t grown to be the competitor it is now.
Putting on my tinfoil hat: Meta let TikTok grow in order to avoid being broken up for being a monopoly.
sepi@piefed.social 13 hours ago
The courts will sell us to the wolves and claim it’s all legal. Courts provide legal processes, not justice.