The UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) opened an investigation on October 30 into whether the commercial terms Meta Platforms (Nasdaq: META) sets for businesses using its platforms and services breach competition law. The terms, which Meta has put on hold, could let it collect content from the websites of publishers and other businesses that use its services and use that content to build its own products, including its AI features, "without those businesses getting a choice on if or how their content is used," the CMA said.
The regulator is using the Competition Act 1998. It stressed that "no decision has yet been made on whether Meta has broken the law." Meta said there were no grounds for an investigation.
What the CMA is examining
The case page sets out two questions, under the Act's Chapter II prohibition on abusing a dominant position:
Whether Meta holds a dominant position in one or more relevant markets in the UK
If it does, whether its existing commercial terms, or revisions to those terms, amount to an abuse of that position
The concern is that requiring businesses to accept the terms "may amount to the imposition of unfair trading conditions" on businesses that rely on Meta to reach customers and audiences. The entities under investigation are Meta Platforms, Inc., Facebook UK Limited and Facebook Ireland Limited. It acted on concerns from groups including the News Media Association and Movement for an Open Web.
Meta One, Meta's new business subscription, is outside the case; the CMA said it is separately seeking information about it, and about small businesses' concerns over paying to post external links.
How the terms got here
October 15: Nieman Lab first reported the terms, which cover websites "associated with" business accounts on Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads.
October 16: Meta removed the word "train" from the terms and limited the use of future scraped content to "advertising and business products," Nieman Lab reported.
Before October 28: Meta moved the effective date from October 30 to November 20 "following active engagement with the CMA," the regulator said.
October 28: Meta announced a pause to the rollout, pending a consultation with industry groups.
October 30: The CMA opened its investigation, 15 days after the first report.
October 2026 to January 2027: "Rapid initial information gathering and engagement with Meta and third parties," a timetable the CMA calls indicative.
What the parties say
Sarah Cardell, chief executive of the CMA, said the regulator would work "to reach a swift and satisfactory resolution to this case."
But where a company holds a dominant position, it must not use that position to impose unfair terms.Sarah Cardell, chief executive of the CMA, October 30, 2026
A Meta spokesman said "there are no grounds for a competition investigation," according to dpa, and added: "We've already committed not to change our terms without consulting publishers and other stakeholders. We welcome the opportunity to explain our approach to the CMA." AFP carried the second and third sentences. Earlier in October, a Meta spokesperson told Nieman Lab that content owners "will still be able to use robots.txt to signal preferences." Nieman Lab reported that, as of October 23, no version of the terms included language about respecting robots.txt.
The Professional Publishers Association (PPA) welcomed the investigation. "Access to audiences should not come at the price of publishers' content," said Sajeeda Merali, its chief executive. The PPA asked the CMA to stop the terms during the investigation and to open a strategic market status investigation into Meta.
AFP also reported that a Norwegian court had temporarily barred Meta from enforcing the new terms after ten media outlets objected.
What it means for publishers and advertisers
Meta's pause does not end the case. The CMA's scope covers Meta's "existing commercial terms, or revisions to those terms," so whatever comes out of Meta's consultation with industry groups will be measured against the same test.
The CMA said it has "limited powers" under the digital markets regime over companies without strategic market status, and Meta has not been designated. The next set of designation proposals goes to the CMA's board in spring 2027. Until then, the 1998 Act is the tool, and it works case by case: the CMA must show dominance and abuse, and after its first round of evidence gathering it can close the case or, if it provisionally finds an infringement, issue a statement of objections that Meta can answer before a final decision. If it does find one, section 36 of the Act caps a penalty at 10% of the undertaking's turnover, a maximum rather than an estimate.
The CMA's 2021 Competition Act case against Meta, over its use of data from digital display advertising, shows how long that can take. SaasBuzz compared the two case pages:
Stage | 2021 case | 2026 case |
|---|---|---|
Opened | June 3, 2021 | Oct. 30, 2026 |
First phase | 13 months | About 3 months, indicative |
Outcome | Commitments, Nov. 3, 2023 | Open |
Length | 883 days | Open |
Source: CMA case pages for the 2021 investigation into Meta's use of data and the 2026 investigation; durations calculated by SaasBuzz.
That earlier case closed when the CMA accepted commitments from Meta, without a decision on whether the law had been broken. The new timetable gives the first, information-gathering stage roughly a quarter of the time the same stage took then, which fits Cardell's word "swift".
What to watch
Meta's consultation with industry groups, and the text of any revised terms it proposes
Interim measures: the Act lets the CMA impose them where temporary action is needed "to prevent significant damage or protect the public interest," and the PPA has asked for the terms to be stopped during the case
Robots.txt: Meta says content owners can still use it to signal their preferences, though the terms do not say so, and a site can set its crawler preferences there now
Spring 2027, when the CMA's board considers its next strategic market status proposals
