Mark Zuckerberg's failed negotiations with the FTC to end Meta's antitrust case
77 comments
·April 15, 2025bearjaws
Why is a fine even an acceptable resolution?
Previously the FTC had been running such that, if it could not prove an acquisition was bad it would approve it.
In this case, back in 2012 Instagram was small, didn't charge money, and not considered a competitor to Facebook.
Well, we sure as hell know now it was a bad idea. Harmed consumer privacy, removed other competitors, and expanded the network effect of then Facebook.
And before anyone says "oh what about YouTube, X, TikTok, competitors" - Yes they should all be split off from their parent companies too.
giancarlostoro
My favorite was that the deal was where Facebook agreed not to import IG into FB. They have merged the two together so much so that if Facebook has a complete outage, so does IG. Not only that, but Facebook "magically" knows when I'm on IG and vice versa.
transcriptase
Much like when a company is acquired and the execs of the acquisition assure everyone that nothing is going to change.
Until it inevitably and drastically does because those execs no longer have any real power even if they weren’t explicitly lying.
tialaramex
Oh yeah, lots of "First Time?" meme opportunities during acquisition.
granzymes
>deal was where Facebook agreed not to import IG into FB
What deal was this?
captn3m0
This was for WhatsApp
pdpi
> They have merged the two together so much so that if Facebook has a complete outage, so does IG.
If AWS has a complete outage, so do many completely unrelated businesses. As a regulator, "running on the same infrastructure" would be the least of my worries and an acceptable carve-out for a "no integration" clause.
zelphirkalt
Running on separate infrastructure makes it a lot easier to confirm for an auditor, that data is not being merged or used in combination though.
alex1138
Also I think if you sign up for Instagram you get Threads lol
Nice account you got there, would be a shame if you deleted Threads and also deletes your Insta
soco
But on my Android I got no Threads. True, IG tries their best to convince me to install it. Maybe I don't have it because my IG was created before times?
joey_spaztard
Also, Facebook/Meta said they would not be able to link WhatsApp accounts to facebook accounts. After they were allowed to buy WhatsApp they unsurprisingly began using metadata for things like knowing who Facebook users are talking to.
They paid some fines that they show no sign of caring about.
drivingmenuts
I don't think the people running the FTC care what happens so long as they land a huge sum of money to satisfy their boss. I suspect the FTC is not long for this world anyway and after this, it'll be a much more direct threat. Maybe I'm too paranoid and pessimistic, but a year ago that wouldn't even have been a consideration. Now, it's a possibility.
paulddraper
The FTC signed off on the acquisition.
Now they have third party buyers remorse.
dtquad
This anti-big-tech hysteria in the US is dangerous. Applying early 20th antitrust thinking to modern tech companies is short sighted and doesn't show the whole picture. These American big tech companies that people like Steve Bannon and Lina Khan want to split up have been responsible for not only the impressive US GDP and wealth recovery and growth since the 2008 financial crisis but also for much of the rest of the world's wealth recovery and growth since the 2008 crisis.
Danish pension funds have 25% allocation on US stocks but ~70% of the total returns in 2022-2024 came from US stocks with big tech companies leading the charge.
KoolKat23
Inequality is growing massively, it is also not necessarily the best use of capital, whilst this growth may be big, if it were not so concentrated it would likely be even larger. Concentration of capital leads to inefficiency, a small but relevant example, large mansions and super yachts. The marginal propensity to consume also needs to be considered, we live in a demand driven world.
ethbr1
Indeed. I'd argue that failing to apply robust antitrust enforcement (as the US hasn't in the last 20 years) is short-sighted.
It creates monolithic companies that are enormously profitable at the cost of innovation.
Fewer huge companies will never innovate as quickly as a diverse and competitive ecosystem, especially when the cost to develop and deliver is minimal.
Seen another way, the current Big Tech landscape creates artificial barriers that limit startups' access to customers compared to what the internet and mobile previously enabled.
sc68cal
"monopolies are good because line goes up"
dtquad
>monopolies
Where exactly? They lose market share to every new AI wrapper app and most young people are on the Chinese video app.
>are good because line goes up
The "line goes up" sarcasm really doesn't work when we are actually suddenly in a "line goes down" situation and it clearly sucks.
grg0
So weird seeing him dressed up without his redpilled-Zuck-style over-sized t-shirt.
justonceokay
Ed Hardy isn’t a good look for him
null
giancarlostoro
Assuming Mark Zuckerberg coughs up 30 billion somehow, who gets that money? Like really, and where does it go to? Serious question.
AlotOfReading
As far as I'm aware, the FTC's collections are unencumbered, so they just go into the general fund along with things like taxes. That's used to finance the basic and ongoing operations of the federal government. Collections by other agencies are sometimes earmarked by Congress to do things like set aside x% of collections to fund further enforcement actions or divert a bit into something like the SEC's whistleblower fund.
philipallstar
The bureaucracy must expand to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
transcriptase
The treasury. It basically means 30 billion fewer dollars will need to be conjured for outgoing payments.
dylan604
Oh look, here's how we can pay for that tax cut for the über wealthy! Thanks Zuck!!
zelphirkalt
It could be well invested in areas preventing social media addiction, like education for example.
null
CyberDildonics
"Who gets it" and "where does it go" are the same question.
SecretDreams
Trump's kids?
brandall10
"Zuckerberg offered much less and hoped Trump would back him up."
I wouldn't be surprised if a certain amount was offered through backchannels to his family, and someway, somehow, Trump didn't have the influence over this case like was expected.
valeg
Trump is offended by measly sums which Zuck has put in his pocket. Anti-trust crusade is a perfect way to shake more from him. Give the bully an inch, he will take a mile.
1vuio0pswjnm7
"FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson found the offer not credible, and wasn't ready to settle for anything less than $18 billion and a consent decree."
"Former FTC Chair Lina Khan told the Journal that the company's $450 million settlement offer was "delusional.""
thaumasiotes
> “We haven’t been shy about explaining why it doesn’t make sense for the FTC to bring a case to trial that requires it to prove something every 17-year-old in America knows is absurd—that Instagram doesn’t compete with TikTok,” she said.
In this hypothetical scenario:
1. Instagram competes with TikTok, winning a minority share of the market.
2. The government decrees that TikTok is anathema and expels them from the market.
3. The government sues Instagram for having a supermajority share of the remaining market.
I feel like there should be a form of estoppel preventing the argument.
dtquad
Maybe apps that take less than 3 minutes for a 17-year-old to install, register account, and learn how to use, are not really defensible "monopolies" and maybe these apps shouldn't be the target of antitrust laws that were intended for early 20th century robber barons.
OsrsNeedsf2P
People saying Zuck's ass kissing didn't work are missing the point. If it even has a 1 in 10 chance of working, it's worth it
kashunstva
> it's worth it
Only after factoring out the effects of your integrity and self-respect. But I suppose that in Meta’s case we can assume that sort of pre-discounting of character was already done.
dylan604
If you're going to be an ass kisser, you can't do it half way. You gotta make the ass being kissed like it's the only ass you'll ever kiss again. Phony ass kissing is so obvious that the ass being kissed is insulted even more. At that point, you'd have been better off doing nothing
amazingamazing
just ban all acquisitions and stop the charades. all acquisitions will be anti competitive if they succeed anyway
SoftTalker
I take it you don’t work in a startup.
onemoresoop
That’s the sole reason most startups exist, the hope for payday by acquisition..
techpineapple
That might be amazing.
semiquaver
What? How would that work?
jprd
Startups would try and build a profitable business instead of aiming for an acquisition.
Or do you mean preventing the acquisitions in a legal manner?
esafak
There is nothing wrong with acquisitions. It's one way big companies rejuvenate, and startups get a liquidity event. And if it's not an acquihire, the product can get broader distribution. Some companies are started to be acquired; their product of value mostly to big companies.
rvz
Microsoft will be targeted last, [0] with good reason. (They know how to avoid anti-trust scrutiny the best).
This is why Google, Apple, Amazon and Meta have all been targeted first, before building a huge case for Microsoft.
Again, it won't be easy as the FTC and the DOJ have failed to break Microsoft up many times.
null
https://archive.ph/w58QJ