The European Commission has indicated that Meta, the company formerly known as Facebook, may have violated antitrust laws by restricting third-party AI assistants from interfacing with users on WhatsApp. This development marks a significant escalation in the Commission’s ongoing scrutiny of large technology firms and their competitive practices in the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence.
On February 9, 2026, the Commission revealed its intention to compel Meta to lift this restriction, which it believes undermines competition in the market for AI assistants. “We are considering interim measures to keep the market open, ensure fair access for rivals, and provide options for users while preventing harm to competition as the investigation continues,” said Competition Commissioner Teresa Ribera in a post on Bluesky. Ribera’s approach reflects a more aggressive stance against U.S. tech giants than that of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who has remained less vocal on this issue since late 2024.
According to the Commission, Meta’s actions “risk blocking competitors from entering or expanding” in the burgeoning AI assistant market. The company’s restrictive updates to the WhatsApp Business Solution terms of service, implemented in mid-October, triggered an investigation that began in early December. This investigation has already led the Italian competition authority to impose interim measures, allowing external AI assistants to interact with WhatsApp users in Italy. The Commission’s recent objections notably exclude Italy from its findings.
Globally, there has been similar scrutiny. Brazil’s antitrust authority also issued a directive addressing Meta’s practices, though a court subsequently suspended the injunction, which Meta is using to argue against the Commission’s objections. “The facts are that there is no reason for the EU to intervene in the WhatsApp Business API,” a Meta spokesperson stated, asserting that users can access numerous AI options through various platforms. This assertion fundamentally challenges the Commission’s rationale, which posits that WhatsApp serves as a critical distribution channel for AI solutions.
Meta’s integration of its AI assistant into WhatsApp, which took place early last year, was delayed due to regulatory concerns regarding the use of European user data for training purposes without consent. European regulators and a German regional court eventually determined that Meta could invoke “legitimate interests” as a legal basis under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for this practice. However, competition law experts have cautioned that linking Meta AI with the company’s existing popular products exhibits characteristics typical of antitrust abuse.
This scrutiny is not new for Meta; the company has faced significant issues with European antitrust authorities previously. In 2014, the Commission approved Meta’s acquisition of WhatsApp under the premise that it would not merge user accounts across both platforms. However, after Meta proceeded to do just that, it incurred a €110 million fine for misleading regulators.
In the U.S., the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) faced a setback in November 2025 when a federal judge ruled against its attempt to unwind Meta’s acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram, concluding that the company does not hold a monopoly in social networking. The FTC has announced plans to appeal that ruling, further highlighting the ongoing tensions between regulatory bodies and major tech firms.
The developments surrounding Meta and its AI assistant integration reflect broader concerns regarding competition and regulation in the technology sector, especially as AI continues to reshape market dynamics. The European Commission’s investigation and potential actions could have lasting implications not only for Meta but for the regulatory landscape affecting tech giants across the globe.
See also
OpenAI’s Rogue AI Safeguards: Decoding the 2025 Safety Revolution
US AI Developments in 2025 Set Stage for 2026 Compliance Challenges and Strategies
Trump Drafts Executive Order to Block State AI Regulations, Centralizing Authority Under Federal Control
California Court Rules AI Misuse Heightens Lawyer’s Responsibilities in Noland Case
Policymakers Urged to Establish Comprehensive Regulations for AI in Mental Health
