Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Law Firm Directory
Apply to Paul, Weiss
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
General Discussion
Query about: Big Tech Regulation - US Government Sues Google
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jaysen" data-source="post: 39362" data-attributes="member: 1"><p>It's a fair point to make and one that has protected the big tech giants for some time now. US antitrust law has been shaped by a school of thought, which, put very simplistically, is that monopolies are okay as long as they don't abuse their powers. And when thinking about abusing their powers, we consider whether consumer welfare is being harmed, traditionally by monopolies raising their prices. </p><p></p><p>The issue is Facebook and Google are free to use and exceptionally convenient. Amazon also doesn’t use its monopoly power to raise prices; instead prices are often far lower than could be found anywhere else. If consumers welfare, in terms of price, isn’t being harmed by monopoly power, the question is should antitrust law be concerned?</p><p></p><p>A few issues though:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The problem with some of the Big Tech platforms, notably Amazon and Google, is that they sell products against competitors on their platform, which simultaneously operates as a marketplace. In other words, they own the platform and set the rules. This gives them an unfair advantage and an ability to prioritise their own products (which Google has done previously by prioritising its own products in its search results).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">While platforms are 'free', consumers are often paying by giving up their data. The more data these companies gain, the more a competitive advantage they have, and the harder it is for new companies to enter the market.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Google has the resources and position to pay companies to be the default search engine, preventing competitors from having a chance. If it's hard for new companies to enter the market and no-one can reasonably challenge Google, the argument is that consumers (and advertisers) lose out on innovation and choice.</li> </ul><p>With that in mind, there is a new wave of thinking around antitrust law that is starting to challenge the traditional view.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jaysen, post: 39362, member: 1"] It's a fair point to make and one that has protected the big tech giants for some time now. US antitrust law has been shaped by a school of thought, which, put very simplistically, is that monopolies are okay as long as they don't abuse their powers. And when thinking about abusing their powers, we consider whether consumer welfare is being harmed, traditionally by monopolies raising their prices. The issue is Facebook and Google are free to use and exceptionally convenient. Amazon also doesn’t use its monopoly power to raise prices; instead prices are often far lower than could be found anywhere else. If consumers welfare, in terms of price, isn’t being harmed by monopoly power, the question is should antitrust law be concerned? A few issues though: [LIST] [*]The problem with some of the Big Tech platforms, notably Amazon and Google, is that they sell products against competitors on their platform, which simultaneously operates as a marketplace. In other words, they own the platform and set the rules. This gives them an unfair advantage and an ability to prioritise their own products (which Google has done previously by prioritising its own products in its search results). [*]While platforms are 'free', consumers are often paying by giving up their data. The more data these companies gain, the more a competitive advantage they have, and the harder it is for new companies to enter the market. [*]Google has the resources and position to pay companies to be the default search engine, preventing competitors from having a chance. If it's hard for new companies to enter the market and no-one can reasonably challenge Google, the argument is that consumers (and advertisers) lose out on innovation and choice. [/LIST] With that in mind, there is a new wave of thinking around antitrust law that is starting to challenge the traditional view. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
General Discussion
Query about: Big Tech Regulation - US Government Sues Google
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
