[I]ts confounding to consider why the FTC would file an 80-page complaint arguing that Facebook squeezed out innovative competitors without mentioning the word patent a single time.
On August 19, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a first amended complaint for injunctive and other equitable relief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking a judgment that would split Instagram and WhatsApp away from Facebook as punishment for the social media giants alleged violations of antitrust law. The complaint, which traces many of the same arguments raised in a previous FTC suit that was dismissed by the District of Columbia this June, is yet another reminder that the current wave of antitrust enforcement against Big Tech has been an inevitable result of abysmal reforms of the U.S. patent system that have taken place since the mid-2000s, especially those reforms creating the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and turning Section 101 subject matter eligibility analysis into validity goulash.
According to news reports, the amended complaint recently filed by the FTC includes nearly 30 additional pages of allegations that were drafted mainly to address a ruling by U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg of the District of Columbia, who dismissed the FTCs first complaint this June. These additions include both an identification of Snapchat as Facebooks next-largest competitor in the personal social network sector, as well as detailed numbers on Facebooks engagement with its user base that are redacted in the public version of the complaint. Like the December complaint, the FTC maintains that the relevant market for personal social network services, excluding similar networks like LinkedIn and NextDoor that connect users based on profession or residential neighborhood. It also heavily leans heavily upon allegations of anticompetitive activities surrounding Facebooks acquisition of previous rivals Instagram and WhatsApp.
And yet, anyone who has followed developments within the U.S. patent system has to be struck by the fact that Facebooks dominance in social media has at least as much to do with the inability of smaller competitors to protect their more innovative Internet-based services through patent rights as that dominance has to do with Facebooks merger & acquisition activities. Thats a reality that was acknowledged by IPWatchdog back in 2017, when this blog profiled the many innovative features developed by Snap that Facebook copied with absolute impunity. While other Big Tech entities like Google may have played a bigger part in patent reform, Facebook is a member of United for Patent Reform, a group that supports reduced discovery in patent cases, more stringent patentability standards and other patent reforms that make it harder to enforce patent rights against infringers.
A quick survey of some of the FTCs own language from its amended complaint shows that Facebooks anticompetitive activities involve far more than mere mergers:
Facebooks internal documents confirm that it is very difficult to win users with a social networking product built around a particular social mechanic (i.e., a particular way to connect and interact with others, such as photo-sharing) that is already being used by an incumbent with dominant scale. Oftentimes, even an entrant with a superior product cannot succeed against the overwhelming network effects enjoyed by an incumbent personal social network. (emphasis added)
Antitrust experts often come up against the subject of patent rights, especially in the context of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Although Facebooks social media business doesnt overlap with technical standards, its confounding to consider why the FTC would file an 80-page complaint arguing that Facebook squeezed out innovative competitors without mentioning the word patent a single time, despite consistent acknowledgements by the FTC that smaller innovators need help to compete with market incumbents.
Unable to maintain its monopoly by fairly competing, the companys executives addressed the existential threat by buying up new innovators that were succeeding where Facebook failed.
The complaint assumes that Facebooks major anticompetitive activity is an extensive buy-and-bury scheme without once considering the impact of Facebooks activities at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to knock out patent rights owned by innovative competitors. According to Unified Patents Top PTAB Parties list, Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram have filed a total of 216 petitions at the PTAB. Although there is some overlap in those petitions, Lex Machina shows that Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp have combined for a total of 138 PTAB petitions, 23% of which have led to findings of all challenged claims being unpatentable.
The FTCs complaint even mentions smaller competitors that have been targeted by Facebook at the PTAB without ever once alluding to such suits. The amended complaint notes that, in January 2013, Facebook cut off its application programming interfaces (API) from Voxer, a mobile voice messaging app, allegedly to prevent competition from that app. The FTC fails to mention, however, that Voxer was targeted in five petitions for inter partes review (IPR) filed by Facebook at the PTAB. Those IPRs have all been filed in the past year, well after Facebook allegedly cut off its APIs to Voxer in 2013, but according to AIPLAs 2019 Report of the Economic Survey, the average cost of defending a single IPR through an appeal to the Federal Circuit is $451,000. The IPRs filed against Voxer all failed at the institution phase, but the average cost of defending a single IPR through the petition filing is $114,000, an average cost that grows to $224,000 through the end of motion practice. It can be safely assumed that Facebook bleeding Voxer for more than half a million dollars by filing IPR petitions that had no meritorious claims was likely detrimental to Voxers business interests.
Facebook could merely wait for an app built for Platform to gain widespread adoption, then either build a competing app or reap the benefits of that popular apps user engagement, including valuable new social data for Facebook. (emphasis added)
Once again, the FTC gets tantalizingly close to realizing that much of the actual problem propping up Facebooks monopoly has been its efforts to copy competitors, a Big Tech business model known as efficient infringement. Time and again, the FTC notes that Facebooks social media platform failed to remain innovative during the nascent days of the mobile smartphone era, yet the federal agency evinces zero understanding that this would also mean that build[ing] a competing app would necessarily mean that Facebook was copying competitors, which is made clear by the companys efforts to copy Snap.
Given these mounting consecutive failures, Facebook justifiably feared that its personal social networking monopoly, and its enormous advertising profits, would be threatened by a mobile-first competitor emerging and gaining traction by connecting users in innovative ways and exploiting mobile phones photo or messaging capabilities. Such an entrant could substantially threaten Facebooks advertising profits. (emphasis added)
Again, not once does the FTCs 80-page complaint ever note Facebooks efforts to knock out its competitors IP, or even mention the word patent, despite every indication that the FTC realized that smaller competitors needed some form of protection to protect the innovative nature of their businesses and compete on a level playing field.
The blind eye that antitrust regulators have been turning toward Big Techs patent killing activities would be laughable if it wasnt so frustrating. The recent legislation introduced in Congress to reduce Apples anticompetitive app store practices? That probably would never have been needed if Smartflash, the inventor of data storage and access systems that Apples App Store was found to willfully infringe and whose patent rights were obliterated by Apple through questionable machinations at the PTAB, had its patent rights respected. Last December, 10 state attorneys general filed an antitrust suit against Google targeting its anticompetitive practices in online search advertising. Google didnt invent search advertising, but the Internet giant did leverage PTAB trials to knock out seminal online search advertising patent claims owned by B.E. Tech, preserving many billions in Googles corporate value while destroying the business interests of an innovative competitor. Earlier this month, B.E. Tech and inventor M. David Hoyle filed a Bivens action lawsuit naming several former USPTO officials, including Googles former Head of Patents and former USPTO Director Michelle K. Lee, for rigging proceedings at the PTAB on behalf of Google, one of the agencys largest stakeholders.
Antitrust suits may eventually be successful at splitting Big Tech giants into smaller firms, but none of these efforts does anything to actually ensure that the resulting markets will allow smaller competitors to protect their innovations against market incumbents that, while smaller, will still have market caps dwarfing small innovators and independent inventors. The sad truth of the matter is that Apple wouldnt dominate app stores, Google wouldnt dominate online search advertising, and Facebook wouldnt dominate social media if the entire U.S. federal government hadnt completely turned the patent system on its head over the past two decades.
Image Source: Deposit PhotosAuthor: nextnewmediaImage ID: 188830032
Steve Brachmann is a freelance journalist located in Buffalo, New York. He has worked professionally as a freelancer for more than a decade. He writes about technology and innovation. His work has been published by The Buffalo News, The Hamburg Sun, USAToday.com, Chron.com, Motley Fool and OpenLettersMonthly.com. Steve also provides website copy and documents for various business clients and is available for research projects and freelance work.
See the original post:
- Report Sounds Alarm Over Growing Role of Big Tech in US Military-Industrial Complex - Common Dreams - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech's ad transparency tools especially X's are failing at their jobs, report finds - Mashable - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech Taps AI Agents to Drive Revenue Growth - PYMNTS.com - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- National privacy standard eyed by Congress for data harvested by big tech companies Nebraska Examiner - Nebraska Examiner - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech is on a generative AI hiring spree - Fast Company - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Disruptive Innovation in the Era of Big Tech - HBR.org Daily - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Betting on US Big Tech? Top Earnings Reports to Watch in the Coming Week - FX Empire - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech Earnings Are Just Around the Corner - Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META) - Benzinga - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- WATCH LIVE: Will Cain holds panel to discuss Big Tech and Trump trial - Fox News - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Google fires 28 workers in aftermath of protests over big tech deal with Israeli government - The Bakersfield Californian - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech offices are getting smaller and that spells trouble for landlords - Quartz - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Asking Big Tech to police AI is like turning to 'oil companies to solve climate change,' AI researcher says - Fortune - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech Comes to Small Town: A Bitcoin Mining Story in Spur - CoinDesk - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big Tech loses its appetite for office space, adding to landlords woes - Inman - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Google restructure leads to job cuts - Mobile World Live - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- FTC's Lina Khan talks big tech monopolies on The Daily Show - The Ticker - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Digital public infrastructure will drive the future, not big tech: Amitabh Kant - BusinessLine - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big tech is downsizing work space in another blow to office real estate | Mint - Mint - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- UK Plans Talks With Big Tech to Limit Online Harm for Teens - Bloomberg - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Canada to Start Taxing Tech Giants in 2024 Despite US Complaints - Bloomberg - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- US quarterly earnings to feature big growth in tech-related companies - Reuters - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Our View: Big Tech: Google continues to harm news groups for its own profit - Mankato Free Press - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Deepfake victims must punish Big Tech because Congress wont - The Hill - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Big tech kneecaps anyone researching it. The online harms bill needs to remove barriers to analysis - Policy Options - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Global future will not be driven by big tech but by India's DPI: Amitabh Kant - Moneycontrol - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Kids Code bills prompt epic showdown between regulators, activists and big tech firms - Biometric Update - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Tech Firms Retreating From Office Market - The Real Deal - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- UKs antitrust enforcer sounds the alarm over Big Techs grip on GenAI - TechCrunch - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- Time for government to regulate big tech - ACS - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- UK Markets Authority Warns of AI Market Capture by Big Tech - BankInfoSecurity.com - April 18th, 2024 [April 18th, 2024]
- 2023 Boosts Big Techs AI monopoly? Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, and others wield money power - HT Tech - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Alphabet (GOOGL) and Meta Shows Power of Ads Over Subscriptions - Bloomberg - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Looking Beyond The 'Magnificent 7' Analysts Just Upgraded These Three Large-Cap Stocks - Anheuser-Busch - Benzinga - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Mapping the Biggest Tech Talent Hubs in the U.S. and Canada - Visual Capitalist - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Google, Meta, other tech giants slash DEI-related jobs, resource groups in 2023: Report - Fox Business - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- South Koreas proposed tech regulations would be a gift to China - The Hill - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Outlook 2024: Big changes to expect in personal tech - The Indian Express - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Big Tech Dumped $17 Billion Into AI Companies in 2023 Despite Frozen Market - The Messenger - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Why OpenAI signals the start of the post-Christensen startup world - Tech.eu - January 2nd, 2024 [January 2nd, 2024]
- Opinion | Lindsey Graham and Elizabeth Warren: When It Comes to Big Tech, Enough Is Enough - The New York Times - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- Globe editorial: Canada can't tackle Big Tech on its own - The Globe and Mail - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- July jobs report and more Big Tech earnings are in the week ahead after markets notch historic run for Dow - CNBC - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- A Setback in the F.T.C.'s Fight Against Big Tech - The New Yorker - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- Be strong in the fight against Big Tech, Canada - Canada's National Observer - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- Decoding volatility: Are big tech stocks as stable as we think? - CryptoSlate - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- Patients think their health data will be leaked and don't trust big tech ... - Contemporary Pediatrics - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Big Tech Earnings Season - Fagen wasanni - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- The problem with Big Tech's voluntary AI safety commitments - Emerging Tech Brew - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- How the Crypto Market Prepares Ahead of Big Tech Earnings ... - BeInCrypto - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- Tony Anscombe: It's Misleading to Ask if Big Tech Wants to Read ... - BroadbandBreakfast.com - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- The Week Ahead: Fed, ECB and BoJ set rates, and Big Tech ... - Financial Times - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- China's Big Tech making a comeback with Beijing offering fresh ... - The Straits Times - July 29th, 2023 [July 29th, 2023]
- Montgomery County school district sues Big Tech over youth mental ... - Washington Times - June 18th, 2023 [June 18th, 2023]
- Big Tech knows most Brits don't know how to protect their online ... - TechRadar - June 18th, 2023 [June 18th, 2023]
- The time for talk is over is time for action on data privacy - The Hill - June 18th, 2023 [June 18th, 2023]
- Meet the man calling out Big Techs climate hypocrisy - Corporate Knights Magazine - June 18th, 2023 [June 18th, 2023]
- Letter: UK watchdog's tough stance on Big Tech should reassure MPs - Financial Times - June 18th, 2023 [June 18th, 2023]
- Peter Thiel on Big Tech: A Throwback Lecture - Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence - June 18th, 2023 [June 18th, 2023]
- Big Tech Is Big Tobacco - The Lever - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Graham fires warning shot at Big Tech: Were going to unleash the courtrooms of America on you - Fox News - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Experts weigh the current cost of anticompetitive behavior in Big ... - NYU Law - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Big Tech lobbying on AI regulation as industry races to harness ... - Center for Responsive Politics - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- 'Big Tech is knowingly fueling a mental-health crisis in this country ... - Morningstar - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- EY's Abandoned Split Exposes Obstacles to Big Tech Consulting - Bloomberg Tax - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Apple CEO Tim Cook calls mass layoffs a last resort, as the company avoids the giant job cuts of its Big Tech peers - Yahoo Finance - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Big Tech stocks are flying! Which ones are the best buys today? - Motley Fool UK - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Why Indian start-ups have accused the Internet and Mobile Association of India of spreading Big Tech propaganda - The Indian Express - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Intimate Images Protection Update Big Tech Warned To Be Ready ... - BC INJURY LAW - May 6th, 2023 [May 6th, 2023]
- Apple Stock and Big Tech Are Winners. Why Cathie Wood's ARK Is Still a Loser. - Barron's - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- White House officials will meet Big Tech CEOs as President Biden looks to tackle AI safety concerns - Yahoo Canada Finance - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- The top 10 buzziest companies Gen Z wants to work fornone of them are in Big Tech, says new report - CNBC - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- Apple Reports Earnings Today. What to Expect. - Barron's - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- Big Tech Earnings: Time to Take Another Bite of Apple? - Yahoo Finance - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- Vibe Check: Big Tech Is Losing Its 'Luster' For The Class Of 2023 Amid Mounting Layoffs And An Uncertain Economy - Forbes - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- Lindsey Graham says Big Tech will kill online child safety bill, teases plan with Elizabeth Warren - Washington Times - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- 'Break them open' new EU rules coming for Big Tech - TNW - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- EY's Abandoned Split Exposes Obstacles to Big Tech Consulting - Bloomberg Law - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- Open Source Communities Need More Than Funding From Big Tech - DevOps.com - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- Night School, Class 3: Big Tech vs the insurgents - Financial Times - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]
- MM View: The Big Tech monster is coming for you - but only if you let it - Money Marketing - May 4th, 2023 [May 4th, 2023]