3 ms·

They most certainly are monopolies and we can see it in their behavior. What America is figuring out that, if the US Markets are going to remain uncompetitive,

They most certainly are monopolies and we can see it in their behavior. What America is figuring out that, if the US Markets are going to remain uncompetitive, than Chinese companies that don't play by the same rules are going to outcompete these lethargic companies that don't want to get better but instead vacuum up all their competitors. This hurts American's technology advantage and competitiveness in the global marketplace. >Again, according to the complaint, Facebook chose to buy an emerging threat rather than compete, and announced an agreement in February 2014 to acquire WhatsApp for $19 billion. >The complaint also alleges that Facebook, over many years, has imposed anticompetitive conditions on third-party software developers’ access to valuable interconnections to its platform, such as the application programming interfaces (“APIs”) that allow the developers’ apps to interface with Facebook. In particular, Facebook allegedly has made key APIs available to third-party applications only on the condition that they refrain from developing competing functionalities, and from connecting with or promoting other social networking services. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2020/12/ftc-sues-facebook-illegal-monopolization https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2020/12/ftc-s...

sanderjd 5y ago
> They most certainly are monopolies and we can see it in their behavior. This is not true for all the reasons I already pointed out in my comment. You can't just wish this away. You need some other theory of the case. I agree with you that all those things are bad, but those bad things just don't flow from monopoly, they flow from some other problem.
- supercanuck 5y ago
  Take it up with the FTC and Tim Wu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Wu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Wu) then, you obviously are more in the know than they are.
  - sanderjd 5y ago
    The FTC is free to make the arguments you and others are making here. I would bet you large sums of money that those arguments will not prevail. In fact I'm quite sure they won't bring cases using those arguments because they know that and don't want to be embarrassed. They will probably bring different arguments and also lobby for other regulatory changes, and I'm all for all of that, but they won't come to court saying "Amazon has a monopoly on e-commerce", because lawyers don't like it when judges laugh at them.

sanderjd 5y ago

> They most certainly are monopolies and we can see it in their behavior. This is not true for all the reasons I already pointed out in my comment. You can't just wish this away. You need some other theory of the case. I agree with you that all those things are bad, but those bad things just don't flow from monopoly, they flow from some other problem.

supercanuck 5y ago
Take it up with the FTC and Tim Wu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Wu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Wu) then, you obviously are more in the know than they are.
- sanderjd 5y ago
  The FTC is free to make the arguments you and others are making here. I would bet you large sums of money that those arguments will not prevail. In fact I'm quite sure they won't bring cases using those arguments because they know that and don't want to be embarrassed. They will probably bring different arguments and also lobby for other regulatory changes, and I'm all for all of that, but they won't come to court saying "Amazon has a monopoly on e-commerce", because lawyers don't like it when judges laugh at them.