Act First, Learn Later: AI Antitrust and the Error Costs of Regulation at Machine Speed
Competition enforcers appear to have discovered their own version of artificial intelligence: act first, learn later. In the span of a week, agencies across four continents moved to reshape how AI products are built, distributed, and integrated—mostly before anyone has shown, in a final appealable decision, that the challenged conduct harms competition.
Last week, a federal court in São Paulo suspended the daily fine that Brazil’s Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE) had imposed on Meta for refusing to open WhatsApp to rival AI chatbots. On June 5, Turkey’s competition authority announced both an abuse-of-dominance investigation into the same conduct and an interim measure giving Meta one month to admit third-party AI assistants. Three days later, the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM)—the first agency anywhere to order interim relief against the WhatsApp restrictions—closed its case in deference to the European Commission, which had expanded its own proceedings to cover Italy. Then, on June 9, the Commission adopted interim measures of its own, giving Meta five working days to restore rival assistants’ access across the European Economic Area (EEA). Africa’s Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) Competition Commission, for good measure, is investigating, too.
Meta is not the only company in regulators’ crosshairs. At its developer conference on June 8, Apple announced that its new Siri AI features will not launch in the European Union with iOS 27, citing the Digital Markets Act’s (DMA) interoperability requirements. The next day, the Commission reportedly rejected Apple’s request for an 18-month exemption, characterizing the company’s decision as a business choice. Earlier this month, meanwhile, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed its first AI-related conduct requirement on Google under Britain’s new digital-markets regime, governing how publisher content may be used in AI Overviews.
One week. A half-dozen authorities. Four continents.
And a common thread: nearly all of this activity is occurring before any agency has demonstrated, in a final appealable decision, that the challenged conduct actually harms competition. Interim measures, preventive suspensions, and ex ante mandates have become the enforcement tools of choice in AI markets. Whatever else one makes of these interventions, they share a defining feature: they front-load the costs of being wrong.