EU regulators have launched a full-scale antitrust investigation into Meta over a controversial change to WhatsApp’s policies that opens the door for the company’s own AI chatbot—while effectively shutting out competing AI providers.
The European Commission confirmed that it is scrutinizing whether Meta is abusing its dominant position in messaging by reserving privileged access for its in-house artificial intelligence services. At the heart of the case is a set of updated business terms that WhatsApp quietly introduced in late October, which clamp down on how third-party AI can be integrated into the platform.
According to those revised WhatsApp Business Solution Terms, external AI firms are now “strictly prohibited” from using WhatsApp’s business API if AI technology is their primary product or service, rather than a secondary or incidental feature. In practice, that means startups and established AI players are blocked from building and distributing full-fledged chatbots over WhatsApp—precisely as Meta begins rolling out its own AI assistant across the same ecosystem.
The Commission’s proceedings apply across the European Union, with one major exception: Italy. Italian authorities have already opened their own competition case examining Meta’s conduct under national rules, so the EU investigation will not overlap with that process. This split approach underscores how high the stakes are perceived to be, both in Brussels and in individual member states.
From the EU’s perspective, the concern is straightforward: WhatsApp is one of the most widely used messaging platforms in Europe, especially for businesses communicating with customers. If Meta uses that scale to give preferential treatment to its proprietary AI while cutting off rivals from the same distribution channel, regulators fear it could distort competition in one of the fastest-growing technology markets.
For AI startups and enterprise providers, access to WhatsApp’s API can be crucial. Many companies have been building customer-service bots, sales assistants, and support agents that operate directly within WhatsApp chats. By rewriting the rules so that AI-focused firms can no longer rely on the Business API, Meta is accused of erecting a powerful gate that only its own services are allowed to pass through.
The policy wording is particularly sensitive because it targets the business model, not just specific technical behavior. It is not simply banning certain abusive or spammy practices; it prohibits the use of WhatsApp’s infrastructure if AI is the “primary” offering. That threshold leaves considerable discretion in Meta’s hands to decide who qualifies as an AI-first company and who does not, raising concerns about opaque and self-serving enforcement.
Competition lawyers point out that this is the type of conduct EU antitrust law is designed to address. If a company that controls a vital platform or “gateway” market—such as a dominant messaging app—uses that control to favor its own downstream services (in this case, AI chatbots) and hobble competitors, it can fall squarely under abuse-of-dominance provisions. The Commission will now gather documents, internal communications, and market data to test whether Meta’s policy changes cross that line.
The case also lands at a politically charged moment, as European policymakers push to keep Big Tech from locking up the emerging AI sector. While the EU’s new Digital Markets Act focuses on systemic “gatekeepers” and their obligations toward business users, traditional antitrust rules remain a powerful tool in situations where a specific practice is alleged to harm competition. The WhatsApp AI policy could end up as a landmark case on how platform power is exercised in the AI era.
For Meta, WhatsApp is no longer just a messaging service; it is a centerpiece of its strategy to embed generative AI into everyday digital life. Being able to deploy Meta’s own chatbot directly into personal and business conversations gives the company a massive testing ground, data flow (subject to privacy rules), and a chance to habituate users to its AI brand. Allowing rival bots equal access could blunt that strategic advantage.
Meta is likely to argue that tighter controls on third-party AI are necessary for safety, privacy, and security. AI chatbots integrated into messaging platforms can mislead users, generate harmful content, or mishandle sensitive data, and Meta may claim that only in-house systems can be properly supervised and compliant with WhatsApp’s standards. The Commission will have to evaluate whether those justifications are genuine necessities or pretexts for exclusionary behavior.
The outcome of this probe will matter far beyond a single app. If the Commission concludes that reserving AI access for a platform owner’s own services is illegal, it could set a precedent for how other messaging, social media, and productivity platforms must treat competing AI tools. That in turn could shape which companies are able to reach consumers at scale in Europe’s rapidly evolving AI landscape.
For now, WhatsApp’s updated terms remain in effect, leaving many AI players in a precarious position. Some are exploring workarounds, such as positioning their tools as “incidental” rather than primary AI offerings, or rerouting users through web interfaces instead of in-app messaging. But none of these alternatives offers the frictionless reach that direct WhatsApp integration can provide, and that asymmetry is exactly what EU regulators have flagged as potentially anti-competitive.