FTC's lawsuit trying to break up Meta will go on

Posted:
in General Discussion
A federal judge has approved US antitrust regulators' second attempt at a lawsuit to break up Facebook after the FTC refiled an amended complaint.




The FTC's lawsuit against Facebook's parent company, Meta, was given the go-ahead on Tuesday after filing a "more robust and detailed" complaint.

CNN's Brian Fung provided documentation that shows Facebook has once again moved to dismiss the case. The judge didn't buy the company's argument that the new version of the lawsuit is "akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic."

Here we go: US antitrust regulators' lawsuit to break up Meta, Facebook's parent, can move ahead, judge rules, after the FTC's "more robust and detailed" amended complaint from last year: https://t.co/X45VIP5Yfu pic.twitter.com/iAnCR02J8u

-- Brian Fung (@b_fung)


The lawsuit, which was initially filed in December 2020, accused the social media giant of anti-competitive practices.

The complaint, then and now, alleges that Facebook violated antitrust regulations by purchasing rising rivals Instagram and WhatsApp in an effort to eliminate competition.

However, a federal court dismissed the complaint in June. The main reason for the dismissal was what the judge called a lack of evidence that the company is a monopoly in its market.

After the dismissal, the FTC voted 3-2 to refile the complaint. Notably, FTC Chair Lina Khan did not recuse herself from the vote. Facebook earlier in 2021 petitioned Khan to recuse herself because of past statements she made that were critical of the industry.

Meta again complained about Khan's involvement. However, the judge ruled on Tuesday that she was acting properly in a "prosecutorial" manner.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 7
    I will be very disappointed if they try to break up Apple.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 7
    I will be very disappointed if they try to break up Apple.
    What grounds would the FTC even have to break up Apple?  Apple is in no way a monopoly as even the California court in the Epic case said that.  In fact, the only thing the California judge could give Epic was by using a really gonzo interpretation of a law that a business lawyer said will likely wouldn't survive appeal (the Ninth circuit put that part of the ruling on hold meaning Epic has basically got nothing).

    Never mind that if the FTC really wanted to do its freaking job it would be doing something about the local cable/ISP company monopolies.
    edited January 11 viclauyycJaiOh81watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 7
    Break up Meta is not good enough. They better off just shut down Facebook. It is bad for humanity and mental health. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 7
    geekmeegeekmee Posts: 560member
    viclauyyc said:
    Break up Meta is not good enough. They better off just shut down Facebook. It is bad for humanity and mental health. 
    Uh, that would be outside their scope or constitutional mandate. It’s not their job to protect humanity or mental health.
    beowulfschmidtcuriousrun8williamlondon
  • Reply 5 of 7
    geekmee said:
    viclauyyc said:
    Break up Meta is not good enough. They better off just shut down Facebook. It is bad for humanity and mental health. 
    Uh, that would be outside their scope or constitutional mandate. It’s not their job to protect humanity or mental health.
    Don’t Look Up.
    robabawatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 7
    FTC could also add multiple counts of fraud, given Meta’s filing in their defense against journalist John Stossel’s defamation suit asserting that their “fact checks” are mere opinion, and therefore not subject to defamation claims, as opposed to claims of asserted facts which are untrue. The mere assertion of an opinion as fact is a fraudulent statement, and Meta has made a great number of such assertions. Indeed, the Stossel lawsuit filing would be evidence of such.
    maximaraJWSCwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 7
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,169member
    longpath said:
    FTC could also add multiple counts of fraud, given Meta’s filing in their defense against journalist John Stossel’s defamation suit asserting that their “fact checks” are mere opinion, and therefore not subject to defamation claims, as opposed to claims of asserted facts which are untrue. The mere assertion of an opinion as fact is a fraudulent statement, and Meta has made a great number of such assertions. Indeed, the Stossel lawsuit filing would be evidence of such.
    It’s beyond outrageous that Meta and their so-called fact checkers think this is OK.  The level of arrogance behind this is enraging!  They are making a separate case that these large information gatekeepers should be broken up. This kind of BS needs to be fought and stamped out ruthlessly.
    longpathwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.