Marketplace was introduced in 2007, 15 years before the DMA set the guidance for the regulatory landscape.
At the time there was no indiction that simply adding a popular and somewhat obvious feature would be seen as anti-competitive given that other classified ad platforms existed and were seemingly doing well.
You have to wonder how many companies will be reluctant to bring new features to EU in the future.
This has nothing to do with the DMA if that's what you mean.
EU is alleging Meta is infringing on the 1994 EEA Agreement specifically the generic "don't impose unfair trading conditions" clause. Which if it successful should frighten most companies. Because making life harder for your competitors is the entire point of business.
If you leverage your business, and data obtained for other reasons, to unfairly depress competition, the end user loses out, and is part of why antitrust legislation exists.
Another example is what Amazon were accused of - using their internal data from providing seller services to then decide which products to launch in their Amazon Basics range - to the point where it makes those other products no longer profitable to sell, and an option for consumers is removed.
If they conducted research without using that data about what products people would like, that's different - that's competing vigorously and fairly.
This is the most salient point on the thread. People are studiously refusing to frame the discussion around this as pro-consumer, and prefer to maintain that it's nothing more than a proxy success-tax on BigTech.
If you want to operate as a marketplace, the EU denotes certain practices and standards for doing so. Don't like them? Don't operate as such.
Yes, the legislative landscape changes - just because you had fists from before it became illegal to hit people it doesn't mean that you are entitled to do so.
Also: One should expect Facebook given 3 years to comply would be able to do so.
Tying its online classified ads service Facebook Marketplace to its personal social network Facebook. This means that all Facebook users automatically have access and get regularly exposed to Facebook Marketplace whether they want it or not. The Commission found that competitors of Facebook Marketplace may be foreclosed as the tie gives Facebook Marketplace a substantial distribution advantage which competitors cannot match.
Unilaterally imposing unfair trading conditions on other online classified ads service providers who advertise on Meta's platforms, in particular on its very popular social networks Facebook and Instagram. This allows Meta to use ads-related data generated by other advertisers for the sole benefit of Facebook Marketplace.
There is a very fine line between over regulation and enough regulation to maximize efficiency.
And that's a bad thing how?
I don't think so anymore. They're clearly protectionists with the recent actions against American big tech and Chinese EV companies.
Oh the other hand, one might say — “don’t be monopolistic and you won’t have to pay the fines”. But does this stand up under scrutiny? But how does a company compete with a monopoly without having any monopolistic traits? Duopolies by definition are very close to monopolies.
It’s like the EU is saying “no one be like these guys, but please would someone compete with them for the sake of our market!”