Brussels eyes crowbar for Meta's WhatsApp AI lockout
- Reference: 1770641198
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2026/02/09/brussels_eyes_crowbar_for_metas/
- Source link:
[1]The European Commission has sent Meta a Statement of Objections , setting out its preliminary view that the company abused its market position by blocking third-party AI assistants – including OpenAI's ChatGPT and Microsoft's Copilot – from accessing and interacting with users on WhatsApp.
The move escalates [2]an investigation launched in December 2025 into whether Meta is using its messaging dominance to tilt the AI assistant market in its own favor.
[3]
At the heart of the dispute are changes Meta announced in October 2025 to the WhatsApp Business policy. According to the Commission, those updates effectively banned general-purpose third-party AI assistants from operating on the platform.
[4]
[5]
OpenAI quickly announced it would no longer be available on WhatsApp, where it had more than 50 million users. "We would have much preferred to continue serving you on WhatsApp," the company said, before blaming the policy changes for the move.
Microsoft followed suit, yanking Copilot from WhatsApp the following month. "Copilot on WhatsApp has helped millions of people connect with their AI companion in a familiar, everyday setting," Redmond sobbed, noting that a transition was needed due to WhatsApp's policy change.
[6]
The restrictions, which came fully into force on January 15, left Meta's own chatbot, Meta AI, as the only assistant allowed to plug directly into WhatsApp.
Competition regulators said on Monday they preliminarily believe Meta holds a dominant position in consumer messaging across the European Economic Area, largely due to WhatsApp's enormous user base. In Brussels' view, the app is becoming a crucial gateway for AI assistants trying to reach consumers, meaning blocking rivals could choke off competition before it properly gets going.
The Commission warned that Meta's policy risks causing "serious and irreparable harm" to the market for AI assistants. Officials fear the restrictions could raise barriers to entry, strengthen Meta's foothold in AI distribution, and squeeze out smaller players hoping to gain traction in the rapidly expanding sector.
[7]
Because of those concerns, regulators said they are considering interim measures that could compel Meta to restore competitor access while the broader antitrust probe continues. Such emergency steps are rarely used and typically signal that regulators believe waiting for a final decision could permanently distort the market.
[8]Four horsemen of the AI-pocalypse line up capex bigger than Israel's GDP
[9]Bots are taking over the internet and AI users are to blame
[10]Ofcom probes Meta over WhatsApp info it was legally required to provide
[11]UK gambling regulator accuses Meta of lying about its struggle to spot illegal ads
Teresa Ribera, the Commission's executive vice president for Clean, Just and Competitive Transition, cast the case as an early test of how competition law applies to AI ecosystems.
"Artificial intelligence is bringing incredible innovations to consumers, and one of these is the emerging market of AI assistants," Ribera said. "We must protect effective competition in this vibrant field, which means we cannot allow dominant tech companies to illegally leverage their dominance to give themselves an unfair advantage."
Meta pushed back on the Commission's position. In a statement to The Register , a spokesperson said there is "no reason" for EU intervention and argued AI assistants have multiple ways to reach users, including through mobile app stores, operating systems, devices, websites, and partnerships.
The spokesperson also noted that a similar dispute was previously tested in Brazil, where courts dismissed arguments that WhatsApp represents a critical distribution channel for chatbot services.
Meta now has the chance to respond to the Commission's objections and defend its policy. If Brussels ultimately rules against the company, it could face hefty fines and orders to change how WhatsApp integrates with third-party AI services. ®
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_310
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/04/eu_probes_meta_whatsapp_ai/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aYoStxDWmm5mFOdf0fw_lwAAA4A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aYoStxDWmm5mFOdf0fw_lwAAA4A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aYoStxDWmm5mFOdf0fw_lwAAA4A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aYoStxDWmm5mFOdf0fw_lwAAA4A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aYoStxDWmm5mFOdf0fw_lwAAA4A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2026/02/06/ai_capex_plans/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2026/02/04/ai_bot_traffic_web_browsers/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/23/ofcom_probe_whatsapp/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/20/uk_gambling_comission_criticizes_meta/
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Noooooo!
Eliminating all of them would be the equitable solution.
Re: Noooooo!
It'd be a fair interim ruling that if 3rd party's overglorified chatbots aren't available, then neither is Facebooks own.
Re: Noooooo!
Why the hell would anyone think the answer to supporting one type of shit is to support MORE types of shit? No - the answer is to support NO shit - force Faecesbook to remove the “AI”
This is akin to the idiots in the US that think the answer to people shooting up schools and nightclubs and churches is to distribute MORE guns
FFS
Decision for the Wrong Question...
Oh oh oh, can we first have a decision where they force Meta to lets us kick ALL AI Agents out of WhatsApp????
Some of us dont want that shit at all, in any flavour. And at the moment, you cant get rid of the stupid bloody Meta one.
So that should be the first ruling, allow people to delete/uninstall/dismemebr with a chainsaw ALL AI's in WhatsApp. Then they can make a second ruling for those people who actually want an AI, allowing them to install whichever flavour of AI bollocks is their choice. But it shoiuld come AFTER the first one comes in...
Maybe they'll warm up to the EU now
If the EU ruling is the only reason OpenAI and Copilot end up being available on WhatsApp, maybe we will start seeing some positive rhetoric from these tech companies regarding regulation. It's not just 'take' with the DMA, there is also 'give'; and in the longer term, I'm hoping that the EU ends up with a more interesting market, rather than every company trying to offer a complete vertical ecosystem because they arent allowed to compete horizontally with their rivals on equal footing. But who am I kidding; they'll just appreciate the ruling when it suits them, and scream bloody murder when they get spanked for trying a vertical monopoly the very next day
Re: Maybe they'll warm up to the EU now
Don't expect gratitude.
Re: Maybe they'll warm up to the EU now
and scream bloody murder when they get spanked for trying a vertical monopoly the very next day
I don't use or intend to use Meta AI, but I fail to see any vertical monopoly where Meta offer Whatsapp users the chance to use theirs. There's nowt stopping other AI companies coming up with their own competitors to Whatsapp, let them try that, and stuff them full of their own. If the EU want to do something useful, then perhaps the near-monopoly to pick on is Microsoft.
Well, that's a good start.
Now, if Meta would just complete the job and get it's own AI shitfest away from WhatsApp, I might consider going back.
Might.
What'sCrapp is the problem
Yeah, you're an idiot if you're using one of these LLM chatbots.
But you're a bigger idiot if you're using a F*c*book platform like What'sCrapp. They're lying to you about security, they can see everything you do on there. Yeah, it's end to end encrypted - and one of the ends is their server.
If you care AT ALL about security, remove their garbage spyware from all of your devices.
Re: What'sCrapp is the problem
I find Whatsapp convenient, easy to use and reliable. I don't need encryption, my use is domestic and mundane. If it is encrypted that's good, alternatively if Zuck is stroking his long haired white cat, awaiting hourly reports on my activity then bully for him. Can't see him making money from messages like "What time will you be home", or "Need bleach for downstairs bog".
Re: What'sCrapp is the problem
With me he may get FPL tips
How many chances?
How many chances are Meta going to be given before regulators realise that they will never work in the interests of users, but will always flaunt the law because fines are just a cost of doing business for them?
Effective regulation would ban all unwanted AI chatbot shoved-down-the-throat bullshit and switch fines for jail time.
Until then it’s all fugazi designed to give the pretence of regulation while really just being another tax on the people.
Noooooo!
I use Whatapp, and don't use Meta AI. Why the hell would I want "more choice" of shitty AI assistants crammed in? What's wrong with these people?