> ... why the FTC's complaint relied on establishing a monopoly; the Sherman Act doesn't actually require establishing a monopoly; anticompetitive conduct that

> ... why the FTC's complaint relied on establishing a monopoly; the Sherman Act doesn't actually require establishing a monopoly; anticompetitive conduct that attempts to establish a harmful monopoly is also illegal... Antitrust guy here: this is exactly related to your first point. A monopoly in what market? This is the key issue. The market definition is not obvious to me. “Online communications platform” sounds reasonable to me but that could plausibly include email, so good luck arguing Facebook has a monopoly in that. “Online communications, photo and personal news sharing” is another good potential market. That’s even wider so now facebooks share is smaller. The other problem: where is the harm to consumers?? They get the product for free. This is not Standard Oil or AT&T back in the old days. If it had been up to me I would not have let FB acquire Instagram or WhatsApp for anticompetitive reasons, but the other problem for the FTC here is that they themselves did ! And not that long ago either. I could be wrong but I doubt this case will turn into a winner for the FTC in the end.