5 ms·

The "Platform Competition and Opportunity Act" looks like it would ban big tech companies from buying almost any other companies: "It shall be unlawful for a c

The "Platform Competition and Opportunity Act" looks like it would ban big tech companies from buying almost any other companies: "It shall be unlawful for a covered platform operator to acquire directly or indirectly... the whole or any part of the stock or other share capital of another person engaged in commerce or in any activity or affecting commerce." [0] [0] https://cicilline.house.gov/sites/cicilline.house.gov/files/documents/Platform%20Competition%20and%20Opportunity%20Act%20-%20Bill%20Text%20%281%29.pdf https://cicilline.house.gov/sites/cicilline.house.gov/files/...

faitswulff 5y ago
That would certainly make the internet a lot more interesting.
easytiger 5y ago
So why take risks and innovate if there is less purchase exit opportunity? Who writes these laws?
- yxwvut 5y ago
  Rephrased: “Why burn VC cash with a never-profitable business model if you can’t become a money-losing growth engine for a tech giant to leverage to more effectively sling ads?”
- Aerroon 5y ago
  Isn't it better if companies try to innovate and come up with products that can stand up on their own? Ie the goal should be to not exit in the first place.
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    Yep. Any supporter of free market ideas ought to want more firms competing in each market.
- nexuist 5y ago
  Why not just work for big tech directly if your ultimate end goal is to have your work be purchased by big tech? It's a lot more stable and you'll probably make more money.
  - lmm 5y ago
    Worse working conditions, less interesting work?
FpUser 5y ago
You conveniently omitted the Exclusion class that makes the excerpt posted above quite reasonable. The only thing which is not completely clear to me is whether the items listed in the Exclusion class are combined using OR or AND. In any way every once in a while the US surprises me in a very good way. Congrats if it passes.
- refulgentis 5y ago
  I can't find what you're referring to in the source document. I believe you it's there, but I'm not sure your accusation + lack of content were a net contribution to the discussion
  - FpUser 5y ago
    >"I believe you it's there.." Yes it is there in the same section as the topic mentioned. It has too much of the text IMHO to include in its entirety. Just in case you try again here is the pattern to search for: "(A) compete with the covered platform". >"but I'm not sure your accusation" The poster "accuses" proposal based on a single item taken out of context from the relevant section. Meanwhile the same section includes said Exclusion clause. >"net contribution to the discussion" The net contribution is that the distortion by omission of the bill's section is being prevented.
derefr 5y ago
Or it would force the bigcorps to divest their social platforms and run them at arm’s length, maybe just as shareholders/investors.

faitswulff 5y ago

That would certainly make the internet a lot more interesting.

easytiger 5y ago

So why take risks and innovate if there is less purchase exit opportunity? Who writes these laws?

yxwvut 5y ago
Rephrased: “Why burn VC cash with a never-profitable business model if you can’t become a money-losing growth engine for a tech giant to leverage to more effectively sling ads?”
Aerroon 5y ago
Isn't it better if companies try to innovate and come up with products that can stand up on their own? Ie the goal should be to not exit in the first place.
- tshaddox 5y ago
  Yep. Any supporter of free market ideas ought to want more firms competing in each market.
nexuist 5y ago
Why not just work for big tech directly if your ultimate end goal is to have your work be purchased by big tech? It's a lot more stable and you'll probably make more money.
- lmm 5y ago
  Worse working conditions, less interesting work?

FpUser 5y ago

You conveniently omitted the Exclusion class that makes the excerpt posted above quite reasonable. The only thing which is not completely clear to me is whether the items listed in the Exclusion class are combined using OR or AND. In any way every once in a while the US surprises me in a very good way. Congrats if it passes.

refulgentis 5y ago
I can't find what you're referring to in the source document. I believe you it's there, but I'm not sure your accusation + lack of content were a net contribution to the discussion
- FpUser 5y ago
  >"I believe you it's there.." Yes it is there in the same section as the topic mentioned. It has too much of the text IMHO to include in its entirety. Just in case you try again here is the pattern to search for: "(A) compete with the covered platform". >"but I'm not sure your accusation" The poster "accuses" proposal based on a single item taken out of context from the relevant section. Meanwhile the same section includes said Exclusion clause. >"net contribution to the discussion" The net contribution is that the distortion by omission of the bill's section is being prevented.

derefr 5y ago

Or it would force the bigcorps to divest their social platforms and run them at arm’s length, maybe just as shareholders/investors.