The European Commission has ordered Meta to restore free access to WhatsApp for rival artificial intelligence assistants, in a competition case that tests how far Brussels is prepared to intervene in emerging AI markets before dominant platforms become closed distribution channels.
The decision, announced under interim measures, requires Meta to reinstate access for third-party general-purpose AI assistants to the WhatsApp Business API under the same conditions that existed before a policy change introduced in October 2025. The order will apply while the Commission continues its antitrust investigation into whether Meta abused its market power by excluding competitors from one of Europe’s most widely used messaging services.
The case centres on the WhatsApp Business API, which allows companies and service providers to communicate with users through WhatsApp. According to the Commission, Meta’s policy change blocked third-party AI assistants from accessing and interacting with users on the platform, while Meta’s own AI assistant remained available. Brussels argues that such conduct risks preventing competitors from entering or expanding in a fast-developing market.
The Commission opened its investigation in December 2025 and later informed Meta that it was considering emergency action. In April, it sent a supplementary charge sheet, saying Meta’s proposed modifications did not remove the competition concerns. Reuters reported that Meta had offered limited free access to rival AI chatbot providers, but that access would become paid after certain usage thresholds.
Brussels has now decided that those changes were insufficient. The Commission said Meta must restore the previous access conditions within five working days. The interim order is designed to prevent what EU officials describe as serious and irreparable harm to competition before the full antitrust investigation is concluded.
The timing is important. Messaging applications are increasingly likely to become gateways through which consumers use AI assistants, search tools, customer-service systems and automated commercial functions. If access to those channels is controlled by the same company that operates a competing AI assistant, rival providers may struggle to reach users even if their products are technically available elsewhere.
For Brussels, the case therefore goes beyond WhatsApp. It is an early intervention in the infrastructure through which AI services may be distributed to consumers and businesses. Competition authorities are trying to avoid a repeat of earlier digital markets, where access, default settings and platform rules gave large incumbents durable advantages before regulators acted.
Meta disputes the Commission’s approach. The company has argued that the order would oblige it to subsidise access for large AI providers, including OpenAI, while imposing costs on businesses using WhatsApp services. According to Reuters, Meta said it would appeal the decision.
The company is already under sustained EU regulatory pressure. Its services are subject to scrutiny under competition law, the Digital Markets Act, data-protection rules and platform regulation. The WhatsApp case, however, is notable because it uses interim measures, a tool reserved for situations where regulators believe that waiting for a final decision could allow market damage to become difficult to reverse.
The Commission’s action also shows how AI competition is moving beyond model development. The public debate has often focused on the companies building large language models, the chips used to train them and the energy demand of data centres. The WhatsApp case points to another layer of control: the consumer-facing platforms where AI assistants reach users.
If WhatsApp becomes a major interface for AI services, access to the platform could influence which assistants consumers use, which firms can scale in Europe and how business communication is automated. The question for regulators is whether a dominant messaging platform can set access conditions in ways that advantage its own AI product.
For smaller AI companies, the issue is particularly acute. Paying for access to a major platform may be commercially difficult at the early stage of growth. For larger competitors, including OpenAI, the dispute is about whether dominant platforms can use existing user networks to limit rival AI services.
The Commission has not reached a final finding that Meta breached EU competition rules. The interim order preserves access while the investigation continues. If Brussels ultimately concludes that Meta violated EU antitrust law, the company could face fines of up to 10 per cent of global annual turnover.
The case is likely to be watched closely by other technology companies. It suggests that the Commission is prepared to act before AI markets mature fully, particularly where control over an existing platform may shape the competitive position of AI services. It also signals that access to messaging, app distribution and business communication channels will form part of the EU’s wider competition approach to artificial intelligence.
For European users and companies, the immediate effect is limited to the availability of rival AI assistants through WhatsApp’s business interface. The wider significance is regulatory. Brussels is attempting to ensure that AI competition is not decided only by those companies that already control the platforms on which users communicate.
