[ad_1]
Towards the beginning of the previous century, US antitrust regulators dissolved Standard Oil. In the 1980s, they did the same with the AT & T telephone monopoly. Big Tech is now in their sights. The Ministry of Justice's antitrust investigation announced last week could mark a turning point for companies that have gone from brave start-ups to key drivers of digital innovation to alleged threats to privacy and competition in the digital world – and beyond. In its brief statement, the DoJ indicated that it would review online platforms that have "reduced competition, inhibited innovation or harmed consumers", and "behaved appropriately" if they have violated the law.
This decision could still be an important step towards structural reform. That happened just after the Federal Trade Commission imposed a record $ 5 billion fine on Facebook for its irresponsible data protection practices, as well as allowing society to better protect privacy. of its users. However, the FTC's decision did not allay fears of the power of the biggest tech companies. If he wants to change that, the justice department should adjust the bar for antitrust legislation. It should also engage with other organizations to maximize its impact.
Embedding the new Brandeis School of Antitrust Law would provide a powerful competitive tool. Since the 1980s, anti-trust legislation has been used to determine whether customers are spending more than they should. This is no longer necessary, as digital services are costing more and more privacy in the long run rather than money.
Modern anti-trust legislation should focus on the well-being and threats that some of the largest online platforms pose to the political, economic and personal lives of users. Facebook's purchase of WhatsApp and Instagram has provided a wealth of data to target ads while eliminating potential competition. Since these platforms are used to share news, it has also increased Facebook's power over what people read and watch.
The DoJ would do well to draw lessons from the EU, which has taken a long time: it has been two years since the European Commission sentenced Google to a fine of 2.42 billion euros. for abusing his dominant position as a search engine. Last April, an EU-commissioned report called for less stringent anti-trust rules targeting "dominant players", showing the nuance needed to protect small businesses.
US President Donald Trump criticized European Commissioner Margrethe Vestager for suing Silicon Valley groups, saying it was up to US regulators. The DoJ should ignore his incendiary language. Alongside its European counterparts, it can create a multilateral antitrust framework and fight the bursting of internet regulation.
Cooperation between the DoJ and the FTC will also be vital. An agreement was reached early this month for the DoJ to focus on Google and Apple, while the FTC would study Facebook and Amazon. Last week, Facebook confirmed that the FTC was investigating for antitrust reasons. At present, it is not known how the two surveys will interact. Clarity is needed to reduce duplication. Close communication will also reduce the risk of separate investigations reaching different conclusions.
Advocates of Big Tech companies claimed that the groups were being punished for their success. They are wrong to regard anti-trust legislation as a revenge. It's about ensuring that the next generation of competitors have a chance to fight and reduce the power of a few companies to millions of users. The scale counts, but bigger is not intrinsically better.
Source link
