6 ms·
This Techdirt piece describes that lawmakers fixed none of the problems and actually exempts a lot of actual monopolies such as telecom (Example: AT&T and Veriz
by leotravis10 4y ago
This Techdirt piece describes that lawmakers fixed none of the problems and actually exempts a lot of actual monopolies such as telecom (Example: AT&T and Verizon) and retail (Example: Walmart and Target): https://www.techdirt.com/2022/05/27/senator-klobuchar-fixed-none-of-the-problems-with-her-antitrust-bill-but-made-sure-to-carve-out-actual-monopolists-like-telcos-and-finance-companies/ https://www.techdirt.com/2022/05/27/senator-klobuchar-fixed-...
- judge2020 4y agoThe big issue explained in the Techdirt piece is how it only has a chance of passing because it's a trojan horse for other companies to sue the big companies (FB, Google, Apple) for the moderation decision they make, including Google downranking spammy sites that nobody likes being sent to.
- ocdtrekkie 4y agoTechdirt/Copia Institute is a lobbyist which is sponsored by Google. Mike Masnick reads like a Google public policy playbook, because that's what he's copying from.
- tomComb 4y agoAny evidence that Google pays masnick or techdirt?
- ocdtrekkie 4y agoMike's own website: https://copia.is/ https://copia.is/ (scroll down to sponsorship logos) Copia has also been listed on Google's own public policy transparency website in the past, though it's absent at the moment. EDIT: This version of the disclosure is still up: https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/trade_association_and_third_party_groups.pdf https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/trade_association_... Note that the Google Public Policy Team's explicit purpose is to influence laws to be favorable to the company. Paying "think tanks", lobbyists, and political action groups is explicitly about avoiding government regulation for Google, as Mike is doing here.
- tomComb 4y agoInteresting, and good to know. The part I don’t get is that Google is listed right next to Yelp, who are the #1 advocates for regulatory action against Google.
- judge2020 4y agoThat's because Yelp can only extort businesses if Google puts them at the top of search results, instead of providing a quick link to unbiased reviews on Google Maps.
- csdreamer7 4y agoThey are listed as a 3rd party org. In the same list as the EFF, Public Knowledge, and the Democrat and Republican Attorneys General Associations.
- ocdtrekkie 4y agoThat's pretty much a catchall term for groups on this list. But every organization on that list is paid by the Public Policy team, whose goal is to influence the law in a favorable direction for Google. That both includes funding politicians (like governors) and people who will write favorable statements for Google online (like Mike Masnick).
- pitaj 4y agoHow the hell are Walmart and Target, stark competitors in the same space, both monopolies?
- jszymborski 4y agoAn oligopoly, then? A cartel?
- bombcar 4y agoThese anti-monopoly laws always end up as “make restrictions preventing new competitors at some cost the big companies can easily handle”.
- Teever 4y agoAlways? All anti-monopoly laws, ever?
- diegoholiveira 4y agoThat’s a hypothesis explored by some authors, like here: https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/big-business-rise-american-statism-roots-regulation https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/big-busin...
- Teever 4y agoLibertarian is a word for people who are too bashful to describe themselves as Feudalists.
- pessimizer 4y agoYes, that's why the biggest companies are constantly lobbying to pass antitrust legislation. Because of the extensive history of small upstart competitors being destroyed in antitrust cases.
- BurningFrog 4y ago
- EarlKing 4y agoIt's worse than you think. The definition of a Covered Platform is so overbroad that basically if you allow any kind of user interaction on your website (or OPERATING SYSTEM!) then yours is a covered platform. So imagine you run a restaurant and allow for a customer feedback form that is visible on the website... congratulations, you've now become a covered platform and are obliged to allow other people to sell products on your website. No, I'm not kidding. That is precisely how badly written this thing is.
- EMIRELADERO 4y agoDoesn't the bill text also have thresholds that need to be met (such as revenue, user quantity, etc) for you to be subject to enforcement?
- EarlKing 4y agoDoes that make it any better? "Oh, hey, here's this absolutely horrible law, but don't worry, it only applies if you're successful."
- ethbr0 4y agoYes, if the intent is to regulate monopolies. You know what you call a small cap monopoly? Not a monopoly.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoLet's say I make a miracle drug for people with a rare disease, patent it, and it costs $0.01 to produce, and I'll watch people die unless they pay me >$1M. Am I a monopoly since I only have a few million in revenue?
- ethbr0 4y agoNot in the sense that we're worried about here. I feel like I shouldn't have to spell this out, but we're using "monopoly" in the sense of "monopolistic abuse specifically enabled by large revenue and/or platform gatekeeping." Whether you think other kinds of monopolies are a problem or not is immaterial, because we're talking about a specific type of monopoly, that a number of us do have a problem with.