News
NJ Joins Antitrust Lawsuit Against Facebook
NJ has joined 47 other states in suing Facebook, Inc. for allegedly violating federal antitrust laws.
NJ has joined 47 other states in an antitrust lawsuit against Facebook, Inc.
The suit alleges Facebook violated federal antitrust laws by monopolizing the market for personal social networking services, and by using illegal mergers and other anti-competitive tactics to maintain its monopoly power, according to Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal.
Filed in federal court, the multi-state complaint alleges that Facebook has aggressively maintained “monopoly power” in the market for personal social networking services for a decade.
According to the filing, the widely popular social media platform has hindered competition and dominated the market “by deploying a buy or bury strategy” to eliminate competition from emerging rivals, which in turn has harmed Facebook’s consumers, advertisers, competitors and the economies of the states.
The complaint alleges that Facebook’s illegal conduct resulted in exorbitant profits for the company and a diminished experience – including fewer privacy options – for users of Facebook’s core platform, as well as for users of the once-rival platforms that Facebook acquired, like WhatsApp and Instagram.
“Social networking companies like Facebook exert incredible influence and power over how we experience the world today,” said Grewal. “Meanwhile, they monetize our data and sell targeted ads based on our personal information and usage patterns. But big tech companies that acquire and exert their power and influence over our behavior through unlawful means and in illegal ways must be held to account. And that is precisely what we are doing with today’s lawsuit against Facebook: we are showing that no company is too big or too powerful to avoid scrutiny.”
Facebook, in a statement posted to Twitter, argued that all of its acquisitions had already been subject to government review.
“Years after the FTC cleared our acquisitions, the government now wants a do-over with no regard for the impact that precedent would have on the broader business community or the people who choose our products every day,” the company wrote.