3 ms·
> “We haven’t been shy about explaining why it doesn’t make sense for the FTC to bring a case to trial that requires it to prove something every 17-year-old in
by thaumasiotes 2y ago
> “We haven’t been shy about explaining why it doesn’t make sense for the FTC to bring a case to trial that requires it to prove something every 17-year-old in America knows is absurd—that Instagram doesn’t compete with TikTok,” she said.
In this hypothetical scenario:
1. Instagram competes with TikTok, winning a minority share of the market.
2. The government decrees that TikTok is anathema and expels them from the market.
3. The government sues Instagram for having a supermajority share of the remaining market.
I feel like there should be a form of estoppel preventing the argument.
- dtquad 2y agoMaybe apps that take less than 3 minutes for a 17-year-old to install, register account, and learn how to use, are not really defensible "monopolies" and maybe these apps shouldn't be the target of antitrust laws that were intended for early 20th century robber barons.
- barnabee 2y agoThe network effects, economies of scale, and associated ability to plough huge profits into buying up and out-promoting competitors absolutely make them monopolies.
- specialist 2y ago> I feel like there should be a form of estoppel preventing the argument. Agreed. Alas, our SCOTUS would never limit themselves in that way.
- thaumasiotes 2y agoWhat are you trying to say? Estoppel isn't a limit on the court.