8 ms·
These actions may look anti-competitive, but these companies are all foreign (China, South Korea, Japan). China does anti-competitive stuff to US companies all
by a13n 7y ago
These actions may look anti-competitive, but these companies are all foreign (China, South Korea, Japan). China does anti-competitive stuff to US companies all the time. I doubt there's any legal case for FB abusing monopoly powers based on this email. If anything, this is just very competent business decision making.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago> These actions may look anti-competitive, but these companies are all foreign. China does anti-competitive stuff to US companies . . . I don't think there's any exception in the antitrust laws like "but you can be anti-competitive if the other guy did it first." And anti-competitive behavior in a Chinese company can hardly justify anti-competitiveness against a Japanese company or a Korean company. They may all be in Asia but they are nonetheless different countries. Google is also not a Chinese company, as you are probably aware. Also a note: you don't have to be a monopoly to be charged with anti-competitive behavior. Being a monopoly can raise the standard of behavior and increase the penalties, but anti-competitive behavior can be illegal on its own, aside from whether you have an actual monopoly. For more you can start with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law
- a13n 7y agoI would guess foreign companies aren't protected by US antitrust law the way domestic ones are.
- mrchiefton 7y agoYou seem to suggest that US companies can break the law because some other country is corrupt? I hold "our" companies to a higher standard. I hope judges do as well.
- dominotw 7y ago> legal case for FB abusing monopoly powers I think its referring to legality not standards. what law is FB breaking?
- entropicdrifter 7y agoSherman Antitrust Act
- gambler 7y ago>these companies are all foreign Is there some reason you think they would not do this to a US company?
- cma 7y agoThey explicitly mention doing it to Google.
- a13n 7y agoGoogle has a bigger ad network than Facebook so how is that a monopoly?
- jsweojtj 7y agoLet's track the argument from the top of the thread. > "...And I agree we should use ads to promote our own products, but I'd still block companies that compete with our core from gaining any advantage from us. I'd also keep blockingGoogle but otherwise wouldn't extend the block to anyone else." > "These actions may look anti-competitive, but these companies are all foreign (China, South Korea, Japan)." > Explicitly mentions Google. > Google has a bigger ad network than Facebook so how is that a monopoly? Do you find this statement anti-competitive: "I'd still block companies that compete with our core"?
- jsweojtj 7y agoBut Google isn't foreign and he explicitly says to keep blocking it?
- nl 7y agoIn 2013 FB was far from a monopoly.
- soraminazuki 7y ago> These actions may look anti-competitive, but these companies are all foreign (China, South Korea, Japan). China does anti-competitive stuff to US companies all the time. I can’t believe this needs saying, but neither Japan or South Korea is China. > I doubt there's any legal case for FB abusing monopoly powers based on this email. If anything, this is just very competent business decision making. Facebook does business in Japan and South Korea. I’m sure they have to follow the laws of both countries.