5 ms·

EU is becoming a very difficult place to do business. Marketplace was introduced in 2007, 15 years before the DMA set the guidance for the regulatory landscape

EU is becoming a very difficult place to do business. Marketplace was introduced in 2007, 15 years before the DMA set the guidance for the regulatory landscape. At the time there was no indiction that simply adding a popular and somewhat obvious feature would be seen as anti-competitive given that other classified ad platforms existed and were seemingly doing well. You have to wonder how many companies will be reluctant to bring new features to EU in the future.

aurareturn 2y ago
Agreed. It feels like Europe's DMA is basically just a taxation on big American tech companies. There is a very fine line between over regulation and enough regulation to maximize efficiency.
- EMIRELADERO 2y ago
  So what would your opinion be if the US passed a similar law?
  - betaby 2y ago
    Let's see then and discuss after?
- doublerabbit 2y ago
  > taxation on big American tech companies And that's a bad thing how?
  - olliebrkr 2y ago
    Totally agree, it's not a bad thing. It's a large area of the world saying you do not dictate the rules.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    It depends. Is the EU presenting itself as a bastion of free trade? I don't think so anymore. They're clearly protectionists with the recent actions against American big tech and Chinese EV companies.
    - mdhb 2y ago
      I’d respectfully put it to you that you don’t seem to actually understand how any of this works. You picked two examples that have nothing to do with the accusation of “protectionism”.
tossandthrow 2y ago
That is absolutely not the case: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IC.BUS.EASE.XQ https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IC.BUS.EASE.XQ Yes, the legislative landscape changes - just because you had fists from before it became illegal to hit people it doesn't mean that you are entitled to do so. Also: One should expect Facebook given 3 years to comply would be able to do so.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  What is FB going to do? Remove any reference to Marketplace on Facebook.com and move it to fbmarketplace.com?
  - Etheryte 2y ago
    This is not what the issue is about. The problem is that Meta is giving preference to their own ads over third party ads, not that the platforms reference one another.
    - aurareturn 2y ago
      The posted article is light on details. Is there another source that backs your statement?
      - philjohn 2y ago
        https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_5801 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_...
        aurareturn 2y ago
        I don't see how that link clarifies things. Tying its online classified ads service Facebook Marketplace to its personal social network Facebook. This means that all Facebook users automatically have access and get regularly exposed to Facebook Marketplace whether they want it or not. The Commission found that competitors of Facebook Marketplace may be foreclosed as the tie gives Facebook Marketplace a substantial distribution advantage which competitors cannot match. This is exactly what we're talking about. EU is basically saying that Facebook.com, just by having a marketplace feature is already breaking the law. Unilaterally imposing unfair trading conditions on other online classified ads service providers who advertise on Meta's platforms, in particular on its very popular social networks Facebook and Instagram. This allows Meta to use ads-related data generated by other advertisers for the sole benefit of Facebook Marketplace. Light on details.
Etheryte 2y ago
This isn't even remotely what happened here. Similar to the case where Apple was fined, Meta had years to comply with the new regulations — they simply chose not to and put their fingers in their ears instead. It's naive to think Meta didn't know it was breaking the law, they simply hoped they could get away with a fine that was smaller than the profit made.
- threeseed 2y ago
  > Meta had years to comply with the new regulations This has nothing to do with the DMA if that's what you mean. EU is alleging Meta is infringing on the 1994 EEA Agreement specifically the generic "don't impose unfair trading conditions" clause. Which if it successful should frighten most companies. Because making life harder for your competitors is the entire point of business.
  - philjohn 2y ago
    If Zuck is to be believed, he's not about making life harder for competitors, he's about competing vigorously. If you leverage your business, and data obtained for other reasons, to unfairly depress competition, the end user loses out, and is part of why antitrust legislation exists. Another example is what Amazon were accused of - using their internal data from providing seller services to then decide which products to launch in their Amazon Basics range - to the point where it makes those other products no longer profitable to sell, and an option for consumers is removed. If they conducted research without using that data about what products people would like, that's different - that's competing vigorously and fairly.
    - piltdownman 2y ago
      "If you leverage your business, and data obtained for other reasons, to unfairly depress competition, the end user loses out, and is part of why antitrust legislation exists." This is the most salient point on the thread. People are studiously refusing to frame the discussion around this as pro-consumer, and prefer to maintain that it's nothing more than a proxy success-tax on BigTech.
caseyy 2y ago
I think EU is just building Meta’s monopolistic moat. It creates a chilling effect on challenger tech companies who may not be able to pay these fines. And yet they still know they might be arbitrarily fined. Oh the other hand, one might say — “don’t be monopolistic and you won’t have to pay the fines”. But does this stand up under scrutiny? But how does a company compete with a monopoly without having any monopolistic traits? Duopolies by definition are very close to monopolies. It’s like the EU is saying “no one be like these guys, but please would someone compete with them for the sake of our market!”

aurareturn 2y ago

Agreed. It feels like Europe's DMA is basically just a taxation on big American tech companies. There is a very fine line between over regulation and enough regulation to maximize efficiency.

EMIRELADERO 2y ago
So what would your opinion be if the US passed a similar law?
- betaby 2y ago
  Let's see then and discuss after?
doublerabbit 2y ago
> taxation on big American tech companies And that's a bad thing how?
- olliebrkr 2y ago
  Totally agree, it's not a bad thing. It's a large area of the world saying you do not dictate the rules.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  It depends. Is the EU presenting itself as a bastion of free trade? I don't think so anymore. They're clearly protectionists with the recent actions against American big tech and Chinese EV companies.
  - mdhb 2y ago
    I’d respectfully put it to you that you don’t seem to actually understand how any of this works. You picked two examples that have nothing to do with the accusation of “protectionism”.

tossandthrow 2y ago

That is absolutely not the case: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IC.BUS.EASE.XQ https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IC.BUS.EASE.XQ Yes, the legislative landscape changes - just because you had fists from before it became illegal to hit people it doesn't mean that you are entitled to do so. Also: One should expect Facebook given 3 years to comply would be able to do so.

aurareturn 2y ago
What is FB going to do? Remove any reference to Marketplace on Facebook.com and move it to fbmarketplace.com?
- Etheryte 2y ago
  This is not what the issue is about. The problem is that Meta is giving preference to their own ads over third party ads, not that the platforms reference one another.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    The posted article is light on details. Is there another source that backs your statement?
    - philjohn 2y ago
      https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_5801 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_...
      - aurareturn 2y ago
        I don't see how that link clarifies things. Tying its online classified ads service Facebook Marketplace to its personal social network Facebook. This means that all Facebook users automatically have access and get regularly exposed to Facebook Marketplace whether they want it or not. The Commission found that competitors of Facebook Marketplace may be foreclosed as the tie gives Facebook Marketplace a substantial distribution advantage which competitors cannot match. This is exactly what we're talking about. EU is basically saying that Facebook.com, just by having a marketplace feature is already breaking the law. Unilaterally imposing unfair trading conditions on other online classified ads service providers who advertise on Meta's platforms, in particular on its very popular social networks Facebook and Instagram. This allows Meta to use ads-related data generated by other advertisers for the sole benefit of Facebook Marketplace. Light on details.

Etheryte 2y ago

This isn't even remotely what happened here. Similar to the case where Apple was fined, Meta had years to comply with the new regulations — they simply chose not to and put their fingers in their ears instead. It's naive to think Meta didn't know it was breaking the law, they simply hoped they could get away with a fine that was smaller than the profit made.

threeseed 2y ago
> Meta had years to comply with the new regulations This has nothing to do with the DMA if that's what you mean. EU is alleging Meta is infringing on the 1994 EEA Agreement specifically the generic "don't impose unfair trading conditions" clause. Which if it successful should frighten most companies. Because making life harder for your competitors is the entire point of business.
- philjohn 2y ago
  If Zuck is to be believed, he's not about making life harder for competitors, he's about competing vigorously. If you leverage your business, and data obtained for other reasons, to unfairly depress competition, the end user loses out, and is part of why antitrust legislation exists. Another example is what Amazon were accused of - using their internal data from providing seller services to then decide which products to launch in their Amazon Basics range - to the point where it makes those other products no longer profitable to sell, and an option for consumers is removed. If they conducted research without using that data about what products people would like, that's different - that's competing vigorously and fairly.
  - piltdownman 2y ago
    "If you leverage your business, and data obtained for other reasons, to unfairly depress competition, the end user loses out, and is part of why antitrust legislation exists." This is the most salient point on the thread. People are studiously refusing to frame the discussion around this as pro-consumer, and prefer to maintain that it's nothing more than a proxy success-tax on BigTech.

caseyy 2y ago

I think EU is just building Meta’s monopolistic moat. It creates a chilling effect on challenger tech companies who may not be able to pay these fines. And yet they still know they might be arbitrarily fined. Oh the other hand, one might say — “don’t be monopolistic and you won’t have to pay the fines”. But does this stand up under scrutiny? But how does a company compete with a monopoly without having any monopolistic traits? Duopolies by definition are very close to monopolies. It’s like the EU is saying “no one be like these guys, but please would someone compete with them for the sake of our market!”