4 ms·

The term 'monopoly' is confusing because the pedantic definition is that there's only one player but this isn't the legal definition. It's not actually illegal

The term 'monopoly' is confusing because the pedantic definition is that there's only one player but this isn't the legal definition. It's not actually illegal to be a monopoly but to illegally abuse your market position leading to anti-competitive behavior. Unfortunately, it's never enforce properly as the FTC doesn't have any teeth. I think the only way we're going to solve this is to actually TAX these companies appropriately. This is one of the major reasons they metastasize.

pbourke 6y ago
This case seems like a really stupid way to try to do some consumer protection versus writing laws that do it directly. I’m still confused as to which “market” is harmed: advertisers? Facebook users? other social networks? If the market is Facebook users, what’s the precedent in asserting this level of harm to a market that consists substantially of non-paying users of an inessential service?
- lambda_obrien 6y ago
  > an inessential service Several people will say, "try not having a Facebook account and participating in X," where X is some mandatory part of your life, such as your children's schooling, keeping up with relatives, job-related stuff, social clubs or organizations, etc. It might not be impossible, but it's an undue burden in some cases.
  - GreenWatermelon 6y ago
    Yup, pretty much. It's impossible to keep up with college affairs without Facebook, as a Facebook group is the primary method of communication and organization. It was even worse before the pandemic, since there were no MS Teams or Google Classrooms for each subject. If an assignment was released, it was the representative's Job to male sure it reaches everyone. Guess what did they use? Oh the assignment is delayed? TA announces on Facebook group. Midterms Time table? College Facebook page. All college-wide announcements were made through its Facebook page. Facebook is practically essential for college life. You could say it's the College's fault, but that's not our discussion. What's important is that I can't delete my Facebook without causing a lot of pain in the ass for myself.
- rhizome 6y ago
  >I’m still confused as to which “market” is harmed: advertisers? Facebook users? other social networks? Even with scare quotes it's not a multiple: the social network of Facebook users is an advertising market. You don't have to be a snot-nosed growth hacker to see that FB has a monopoly position in advertising. Here's a test: does FB have any reason to care about the quality of whatever is being advertised in any one ad? Where are you going to advertise if FB keeps putting your ads for your doctor's office next to ones for a child-rape rock opera and/or "COVID-19 is a hoax" seminars? What is your recourse, switching your advertising to Parler and LinkedIn? NYTimes dot com? The 72 next most popular social networking sites around the world? Surely VKontakte runs a clean house. Again, look at railroads. In the Trust era, trains were not the product, were not the market. Transportation was. Here's a nice little rundown: https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1336813617736507397 https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1336813617736507397
majani 6y ago
How is it possible to abuse a market position when there are thousands of active competitors threatening to eat Facebook's lunch in each of the areas it leads in? The app stores and web are still full of social media upstarts
- GreenWatermelon 6y ago
  Because Facebook eats the big upstarts, as evident by Instagram and WhatsApp.
- rhizome 6y ago
  Mostly because your definition of "market" is naive (in the generic sense, not a personal insult) and too-narrow.
slut 6y ago
If only the same entity that is now suing them for antitrust didn't approve these acquisitions, and fairly recently as well.
- adamcstephens 6y ago
  Change has to start somewhere. Why not with the entity that is now admitting it was wrong?
  - slut 6y ago
    Because it wasn't wrong at the time of the acquisition, IG as a company had 13 employees and 10m DAU, everyone was clowning on FB for wasting their money. The company would have went nowhere without FBs network effect, after all it's entire feed was based on pictures posted on FB. FB is just a political scapegoat just like Goog, if we were interested in antitrust we'd be knocking on AT&T's door and not giving them more grant funding every year.
- rhizome 6y ago
  They didn't "approve" it, they closed their investigation, which they specifically called out as not saying there's no violation(s): https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/closing-letters/facebook-inc-instagram-inc https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/closing-le...
  - slut 6y ago
    That's right, they approved Whatsapp, everyone laughed at the instagram acquisition because they paid 1b and the company had 13 employees and 10m DAU. The company would be nowhere without FB.
adamcstephens 6y ago
I think we need to both break up and regulate them. We had a few decades of true antitrust, but the efforts to undermine it were successful. Check out Goliath by Matt Stoller for a decent history.

pbourke 6y ago

This case seems like a really stupid way to try to do some consumer protection versus writing laws that do it directly. I’m still confused as to which “market” is harmed: advertisers? Facebook users? other social networks? If the market is Facebook users, what’s the precedent in asserting this level of harm to a market that consists substantially of non-paying users of an inessential service?

lambda_obrien 6y ago
> an inessential service Several people will say, "try not having a Facebook account and participating in X," where X is some mandatory part of your life, such as your children's schooling, keeping up with relatives, job-related stuff, social clubs or organizations, etc. It might not be impossible, but it's an undue burden in some cases.
- GreenWatermelon 6y ago
  Yup, pretty much. It's impossible to keep up with college affairs without Facebook, as a Facebook group is the primary method of communication and organization. It was even worse before the pandemic, since there were no MS Teams or Google Classrooms for each subject. If an assignment was released, it was the representative's Job to male sure it reaches everyone. Guess what did they use? Oh the assignment is delayed? TA announces on Facebook group. Midterms Time table? College Facebook page. All college-wide announcements were made through its Facebook page. Facebook is practically essential for college life. You could say it's the College's fault, but that's not our discussion. What's important is that I can't delete my Facebook without causing a lot of pain in the ass for myself.
rhizome 6y ago
>I’m still confused as to which “market” is harmed: advertisers? Facebook users? other social networks? Even with scare quotes it's not a multiple: the social network of Facebook users is an advertising market. You don't have to be a snot-nosed growth hacker to see that FB has a monopoly position in advertising. Here's a test: does FB have any reason to care about the quality of whatever is being advertised in any one ad? Where are you going to advertise if FB keeps putting your ads for your doctor's office next to ones for a child-rape rock opera and/or "COVID-19 is a hoax" seminars? What is your recourse, switching your advertising to Parler and LinkedIn? NYTimes dot com? The 72 next most popular social networking sites around the world? Surely VKontakte runs a clean house. Again, look at railroads. In the Trust era, trains were not the product, were not the market. Transportation was. Here's a nice little rundown: https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1336813617736507397 https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1336813617736507397

majani 6y ago

How is it possible to abuse a market position when there are thousands of active competitors threatening to eat Facebook's lunch in each of the areas it leads in? The app stores and web are still full of social media upstarts

GreenWatermelon 6y ago
Because Facebook eats the big upstarts, as evident by Instagram and WhatsApp.
rhizome 6y ago
Mostly because your definition of "market" is naive (in the generic sense, not a personal insult) and too-narrow.

slut 6y ago

If only the same entity that is now suing them for antitrust didn't approve these acquisitions, and fairly recently as well.

adamcstephens 6y ago
Change has to start somewhere. Why not with the entity that is now admitting it was wrong?
- slut 6y ago
  Because it wasn't wrong at the time of the acquisition, IG as a company had 13 employees and 10m DAU, everyone was clowning on FB for wasting their money. The company would have went nowhere without FBs network effect, after all it's entire feed was based on pictures posted on FB. FB is just a political scapegoat just like Goog, if we were interested in antitrust we'd be knocking on AT&T's door and not giving them more grant funding every year.
rhizome 6y ago
They didn't "approve" it, they closed their investigation, which they specifically called out as not saying there's no violation(s): https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/closing-letters/facebook-inc-instagram-inc https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/closing-le...
- slut 6y ago
  That's right, they approved Whatsapp, everyone laughed at the instagram acquisition because they paid 1b and the company had 13 employees and 10m DAU. The company would be nowhere without FB.

adamcstephens 6y ago

I think we need to both break up and regulate them. We had a few decades of true antitrust, but the efforts to undermine it were successful. Check out Goliath by Matt Stoller for a decent history.