FTC refiles antitrust case against Facebook, says no other social network comes close to its scale

[Zorro]

Source: Washington Post

Refined argument is agency’s attempt to correct course after legal setback this summer

The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday refiled a bolstered version of its antitrust case against Facebook in a last-ditch effort to save what has been described as its most important competition lawsuit in decades.

Seeking to overcome a judge’s stunning dismissal of its original lawsuit because the FTC had not presented ample evidence that Facebook is a monopoly, the FTC argues in its new filing that Facebook is in a class of its own and shouldn’t be compared to popular apps such as TikTok, Twitter and Pinterest, which attract a public-facing audience. The complaint argues that Snapchat, with tens of millions fewer monthly users than either Facebook or Instagram, is the company’s next-closest competitor.

“Without meaningful competition, Facebook has been able to provide lower levels of service quality on privacy and data protection than it would have to provide in a competitive market,” the FTC said in the complaint.

Facebook spokesman Christopher Sgro said in a statement that it was “unfortunate” that the FTC decided to proceed with the case. “There was no valid claim that Facebook was a monopolist — and that has not changed,” he said. “We fight to win people’s time and attention every day, and we will continue vigorously defending our company.”

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/08/19/ftc-refiles-facebook-lawsuit-lina-khan/

[elleng]

1. Looking to define the market, it appears;

have to read the decision.

[msfiddlestix]

2. Wishing the FTC the best of Luck and may the 'Force be with them'

[twin_ghost]

3. The FTC can't regulate free speech.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. I doubt this is a First Amendment case

This is more about economics, monopoly, market dominance, and free market compeitition.

[cstanleytech]

9. But are they dominate because of something other than operating their company smartly?

If it was an issue like the AT&T from 40+ years ago I could see there being an argument for breaking them up but this is an entirely virtual company and virtual companies can be toast pretty fast if they lose popularity like MySpace for example which at one time was huge and then it withered and died.

[HariSeldon]

11. The now dominate via "network effect"

Alternatives to Facebook don't effectively exist because the attraction to Facebook is how many other people are already on it. Yes, people could be on multiple services, but most won't make the effort to keep two different services up to date. In legal and economic terms, this can serve as a "barrier to entry," effectively preventing competition from emerging...and that's where the FTC gets involved.

[cstanleytech]

15. Just because its popular with alot of people does not automatically mean that the courts will rule

against a company as a monopoly.
If that was the case Walmart would have been broken up along time ago not that I would shed a tear if that happened nor would I shed any for Facebook or Google if that happened to them.

[bucolic_frolic]

13. So Smart Monopolies are OK?

No, it's about the free market, control of an industry. Their vulnerability to industry changes would not be viewed by economists as relevant because it hasn't happened to them yet. Monopolies by virtue of their size create barriers to entry for other companies wanting a presence in the same market.

[cstanleytech]

14. No, I was pointing out that they might not be one simply due to the internet being fluid and free

enough that a new competitor can come along and unseat them or really any major internet based service.
AOL, Yahoo and MySpace are perfect examples of once powerful internet companies that were unseated even though at one time they were big and pretty powerful.

[bucolic_frolic]

4. scale is the issue - scope and breadth and the social aspect of it

Twitter is not social media, it's public affairs and marketing mostly. There are hundreds and probably thousands of "social" media sites, but their market share is itsy bitsy. Facebook is so dominant it includes most businesses, large and small. It doubles as a reviewer site. It's in every aspect of life.

It's just like eBay. It's still dominant 20 years later. Even though it calls itself a "managed" marketplace. You can't dent it, large or small.

Go at it FTC!

[FakeNoose]

6. This is like breakin' up Ma Bell!

I know I'm showing my age. Everybody under 60 is saying "Who the fuck is Ma Bell?"

[orleans]

10. that made me laugh.

(i remember ma bell!)
anyway, thought i'd google and wiki was interesting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_System

[NavyDem]

12. I am 51

I still vaguely remember the breakup of Ma Bell

[cstanleytech]

16. Not exactly. The bell companies control was physical based as they literally owned the phone lines

where as in this case Facebook does not own the internet so a new company could come along and unseat them as being more popular.

[summer_in_TX]

7. Good luck to the FTC!

Now, Congress should take a serious look at regulating Facebook and other social media giants in the public interest.

A law could require them to create a serious code of ethics for their company, then train all employees and enforce it, revisiting and refreshing it annually or so.

If they document those steps and show evidence of following that code of ethics, holding employees accountable for doing so, then they could retain a modified version of Section 230 protections.

Section 230 exempts social media from needing to follow laws about publishing since they do not control the content uploaded to their site.

[cstanleytech]

17. But how do you regulate something like Facebook which can be replaced by a new site that

might offer more and become more popular? And if some site was to do that and Facebook would suddenly become unpopular would the regulation then automatically shift to the new site?

[summer_in_TX]

21. Place all social media under public interest obligations.

All of them must police themselves stringently if they want to be able to be exempt from being counted as publishers of content and therefore subject to lawsuits for libel, defamation, etc. They must establish ethical codes that are transparent, communicated clearly to all, that are used in personnel evaluations, etc.

Users of social media should have much stronger laws protecting their right to privacy and their personal data.

Laws (and social media's ethical policies) should prevent:
Revenge porn
Violent threats or targeted harassment
Acts of violence
and require their prompt removal, as well as forwarding contact information for individuals posting such to local and national law enforcement.

I would also like to see requirements that algorithms be required to have public interest standards that would assure that factual material and information on how to assess material for credibility be part of what all users see, including those who tend to pursue conspiracy theories.

[cstanleytech]

22. They would challenge that in court and I would not be surprised if they won.

[summer_in_TX]

23. It's not going to be a slam dunk, that's for sure.

But the 1934 Communications Act established public interest standards for radio and later television.

Public interest standards also apply to common carrier provisions for telephone carriers and should apply to wireless carriers as well.

Unfortunately cable, social media, and the internet got left out, only having to adhere to standards of decency, but Congress could establish public interest standards for electronic media.

[Tommymac]

8. Sharply limited my FB footprint over the last 5 years.

Used to post everyday.

Now it is maybe once every 2 months. Maybe.

That is how FB is going to go down - it is losing user base and the more people realize what a shit show Zuckerberg and his racist disinformation based, unsecure dat mining platform really is the more they are moving to other more legit platforms.

FB will be gone the way of the duck billed platypus by the end of the decade. Just hope they can bankrupt Zuckerduck with legal challenges b4 that happens.

[cstanleytech]

18. I dont post at all. I have an account but its just for a handful of sites but overall I do not

see the appeal for social media sites like Facebook or Twitter.

[Tommymac]

20. I keep in touch with European, Asian and SA friends and relatives.

Being active in a Student Exchange program over the years - I have a lot of them.

It was kinda the only way for years but eventually will all move to other platforms.

[Deminpenn]

19. Zuckerberg created the market for social media

and monopolizes it. There is simply no competition for facebook.

Internet websites offer some alternatives for business, industry and government, but, even though small, there's the annual cost of retaining a domain name and having someone to maintain the site. Facebook is free.

Not that long ago there were many blogs, bloggers and forums like DU. How many forums are left?

That's the competition facebook is dominating.

The only company close in size and clout is Google, but they don't share the same space except in advertising.

I see facebook as like the industries at the beginning of the industrial age like Carnegie's US Steel and Rockefeller's Standard Oil. They created those industries and dominated them until they were broken up.