European Commission: Meta's fee for AI rivals to access WhatsApp amounts to a ban

The European Commission believes Meta has not resolved the objections over rival AI services' access to WhatsApp, even though it changed the terms in March. In the regulator's preliminary assessment, the fee that was introduced works like an outright ban: access appears to be open, but in practice it may remain out of reach for rivals.

What the new dispute is about

The question is how third-party AI services can connect to the WhatsApp ecosystem and compete with Meta's own products. In March the company changed its access terms, hoping to settle the antitrust concerns, but the European Commission reached the opposite conclusion. Brussels argues that the underlying logic of the restriction has not gone away: if entry to a platform becomes too expensive, the market outcome is almost the same as if entry were simply prohibited.

For the regulator, what matters is not only the formal possibility of connecting but also whether access is economically realistic. If a competitor has to pay so much that its model no longer works in terms of unit economics, that no longer looks like fair, non-discriminatory access. That is why Meta received a second statement of objections: the Commission is signaling that the March adjustment did not close the central issue and did not convince it that the rules were changed in good faith.

Why the fee did not save Meta

The Commission's approach in this case is fairly tough: the regulator looks not at the label but at the effect on the market. If a company that controls an important communication channel says access is now allowed but at the same time presents a bill that filters out outside players, authorities may treat that as the same restriction in a neater package. That is the point the Commission is now recording in its preliminary position.

In the

European Commission's preliminary assessment, the access fee has the same effect as a direct ban.

For the AI market this is a sensitive signal. Messengers have long since become more than a channel for chat: they are an entry point to services, bots, assistants and business communications. If a large platform can close this layer to third-party AI products through a price tag, it gains a way to protect its own ecosystem without formally refusing access. So the WhatsApp dispute is not only about one pricing policy, but also about how regulators will assess hidden barriers in the AI market.

What Brussels is preparing

The case has now entered a tougher phase. The European Commission did not stop at a new statement of objections and is already considering interim protective measures. Such tools are usually used when authorities believe that waiting for a final decision could entrench harm to competition and change the market faster than the legal procedure can conclude. In other words, Brussels fears that letters and negotiations alone are no longer enough to preserve working access to the platform for rivals.

• The second statement increases pressure on Meta and records that the March concessions were not accepted.
• Interim measures may require a change in practice even before a final decision in the case.
• For competing AI services, this is a chance to win working access rather than nominal access.
• For large platforms, it is a signal that the price of access can also be treated as an anticompetitive tool.

If the Commission goes further, the case could become an important reference point for future disputes over integrations, interfaces and platform access in AI. Companies can no longer count on a formal opening of their ecosystem automatically removing regulators' concerns. They will have to prove that the terms genuinely allow competition rather than merely creating an appearance of openness on paper, and this applies not only to Meta but to other platform owners as well.

What this means

The European Union is showing that in disputes over AI and platforms it will examine not only whether access exists but also its real price for competitors. For Meta, this risks speeding up the proceedings and possible urgent restrictions. For the whole market, it is a warning: an ecosystem can be closed not only by a ban but also by a tariff, and regulators are ready to treat both scenarios the same way if the result for competition is the same.

*Meta is designated an extremist organization and banned in Russia.