By Alex PetrosDecember 14, 2021
If competition against Big Tech were a card game, you probably wouldnt think it was a particularly fair one. The proverbial deck is stacked in the incumbents favor through both natural and artificial competitive barriers from network effects, to the increasing returns to scope and scale of data, to the unprecedented power over the user interface. Lax enforcement has allowed Big Tech to gobble up competitors and they can now wield their power to prevent any efforts to weaken their stranglehold on online markets. Combatting this power is not as simple as tweaking one or two minor things. We need an all-of-the-above approach to both change fundamental market dynamics and strip away the tools that Big Tech has used so effectively to gain and maintain their dominant position.
Thankfully, the House Judiciary Committee is well aware of competitive problems inherent in online markets, given their year-long investigation and over-400-page report issued late last year. Their response is a package of bills designed to strip away the structural advantages and anticompetitive tools Big Tech has used to gain and keep market power. Worried about the gravitational pull of network effects towards large, incumbent platforms? The ACCESS Act of 2021 is your answer. Platforms using their market overseer role to self-preference and protect their power? Try the American Innovation and Choice Online Act. Antitrust agencies dont have the funds to go toe-to-toe with ever-growing Big Tech legal teams and bring big, bold cases? The Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act should fix that. Troubled by Big Techs gargantuan size and the inherent conflicts of interest in their business models? The Ending Platform Monopolies Act is for you.
Thankfully the House Judiciary Committee is not alone in this fight as we also have Senate champions for Big Tech accountability. Senators Amy Klobuchar, Richard Blumenthal, Chuck Grassley, and Tom Cotton are leading the way in issuing modified versions of the House competition package. Highlights have included The Open App Markets Act from Senators Blumenthal and Blackburn to target market abuses in app stores and the American Innovation and Choice Online Act from Klobuchar, Grassley, and a bipartisan team of a dozen senators. Senator Klobuchar and Cottons most recent endeavor mirrors a pillar of the House package, the Platform Competition and Opportunity Act of 2021 (the mergers bill).
Public Knowledge has written extensively about the package. One post provides a broad overview of the entire package. Another tackles the thorny question of how the antitrust bills will affect content moderation (spoiler: not much, and if anything, positively). A third goes in depth on the ACCESS Act and interoperability. This post will offer an analysis of the House and Senate versions of the Platform Competition and Opportunity Act of 2021.
Big Tech earned their moniker through aggressive and unprecedented growth. The fuel for that growth and the key ingredient in maintaining their dominant market position? Mergers and acquisitions. The stagnant technology markets of today, with relatively unchallenged firms dominating personal fiefdoms in the online economy, are exacerbated by Big Techs past anticompetitive acquisitions. Googles dominance of online advertising finds its roots in the acquisition of Doubleclick and AdMob. Facebooks dominance of social networking might not have been possible without gobbling up Instagram and WhatsApp. Amazon ensured it would be the only Everything Store by buying up niche rivals like Zappos and Diapers.com. Apples walled garden has both expanded and grown more oppressive as a direct result of acquisitions like Beats Music and Siri.
In hindsight, its easy to criticize antitrust enforcers for waving these mergers through. After all, antitrust is supposed to protect competition, but it is clear today that many of the aforementioned acquisitions have harmed both competition and consumers. Under the Clayton Act, todays main merger law, acquisitions where the effect may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly are prohibited. Two generations of courts have favored strict interpretations of this provision, made especially difficult in the tech sector due to the necessity of predicting (and proving) what a market will look like in the future.
Enter the Platform Competition and Opportunity Act of 2021. If enacted into law, this bill would shift the burden of proving whether a merger harms competition onto the Big Tech titans themselves. Similar to the rest of the package, the bill only applies to a narrow category of covered platforms which today would mean Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google, and (most likely) Microsoft. These five would have to prove, by clear and convincing evidence that their proposed acquisition does not fall into any one of five categories, else the acquisition is prohibited. They are:
1) Acquisitions not subject to the Clayton Act (Section 7A carveouts). These are the mergers that are extremely unlikely to affect competition in any meaningful way and are already explicitly permitted in antitrust law. This category includes de minimis acquisitions and those transactions that occur in the ordinary course of business (think a company buying office supplies).
2) Not competing with the platform itself. A covered platform cant acquire a company that competes with the platform for any product or service offered by that platform. This covers the bread-and-butter antitrust analysis of two companies directly competing in the same identified market. Think Google trying to buy DuckDuckGo.
3) Nascent or potential competition. A covered platform isnt just prohibited from buying companies that compete with it right now, but also those that are likely to compete in the future. Think of Facebooks successful acquisition of WhatsApp (a flourishing messaging service that could have become a social network competitor) as the kind of acquisition this provision is meant to block.
4) Increasing market power. Beyond competitive threats, a covered platforms acquisition cannot enhance or increasemarket position for a product or service that is offered on, or directly related to, the platform. Think Amazon buying FedEx. This would further entrench its online delivery market power and freeze out would-be rivals that currently use FedEx instead of Amazon. Logistics/package fulfillment is a service Amazon offers, and its certainly directly related to the online retail platform.
5) Maintaining market power. Finally, a covered platform cannot acquire a company that would bolster its ability to maintain its market position with a product or service offered on the platform or otherwise related to the platform. Anything that would make the covered platform harder to dislodge from its current dominant position, such as buying up a critical input or downstream buyer, would fall into this category. Think Facebooks acquisition of Instagram. Instagram was then just a small company, but it posed a serious threat to Facebook on mobile phones, which were quickly rising in prominence. The Instagram acquisition may also have violated other parts of this proposed legislation, but to the extent that the acquisition helped Facebook maintain its market position and weather the seismic shift to mobile, it could have been stopped by this legislation.
Both versions of the bill have a $50 million floor for acquisitions, so small deals which often lack a competitive concern (even given inflation, all of the deals we think of today as having been problematic were well north of the $50 million mark). Theres only one substantive difference between the House and Senate versions of the merger bill. While both bills cover online platforms with a $600 billion market capitalization (the five aforementioned companies), the House version allows for more companies to eventually fall under the bills restrictions, while the Senate version will only ever apply to companies initially designated under the bill. This stickiness in the Senate bill removes worries that the restrictions meant to rein in todays Big Tech titans could be applied more broadly. Crucially, as stated above, the bill would only affect five companies right now, so its not completely changing the merger landscape. But for those covered platforms, expect this bill to significantly curtail their ability to acquire would-be rivals.
If youre thinking that those categories cover most types of acquisitions Big Tech companies might make, youre not wrong. These bills would promote competition against Big Tech, so that fresh and diverse ideas, people, and companies set the direction of future innovation on the internet. No one vision will be imposed on the internet. Yet some critics are concerned about the bills effects on a pretty narrow category of people startup founders whose companies are built to be bought by Big Tech. Some startups today are created as an additional feature or synergy with a Big Tech platform where the most lucrative exit ramp is simply to be bought by a Big Tech titan. This bill would effectively end that practice. As of today, entrepreneurs that promise to competitively challenge Big Tech get laughed out of a potential investors office, while those that offer minor enhancements to todays same platforms get showered in investment cash. Ask yourself if this kind of innovation has really been beneficial for you and other consumers or just beneficial for some venture capital firms and Big Tech itself. Consumers benefit when companies duke it out and fiercely compete over their money and attention, not when those same companies can rest on their laurels because any competitive threats have already been neutralized. Real innovation that actually benefits consumers and disrupts the Big Tech status quo will be more likely as a result of this bill, not less.
This bill has the potential to change the innovation game for the better. Startups still have a buyout off-ramp if they so choose it just has to be any other company that buys them, not one of these five already dominant companies. The Big Tech companies themselves remain free to invest and innovatethe bill just prevents them from buying success instead of earning it. In a world with interoperability and nondiscrimination requirements creating open and fair markets, I think youll see a lot more funding of companies that directly challenge the Big Tech platforms. When these monopolies become competitive markets, consumers can expect more and better choices. Who knows what innovations you could be enjoying right now if we hadnt been mired in a Big Tech Dark Age completely different ways for communities to communicate or even new tools for information discovery. This bill could help restore innovation to the market by reinstating real competition.
In short, the Platform Competition Opportunity Act of 2021 can work in concert with the rest of the A Stronger Online Economy package to tackle the problem of Big Tech. The bill would remove perhaps their most potent tool of growth mergers and acquisitions, yet we need to fundamentally change the structure of Big Tech markets to really let competition flourish. The Senate taking action on nondiscrimination and mergers is huge progress, and we need to build on it. Next, we need Senate companions for interoperability and structural separations, and then to put the entire package on President Bidens desk to become law. Its time to unstack the deck and force Big Tech to play a fair game.
Read this article:
- Douglas Schoen: Americans are united in wanting Congress to rein in Big Tech's power over news publishing - Chicago Tribune - April 25th, 2022
- Communication ETFs fall to 18-month lows ahead of big tech earnings - Seeking Alpha - April 25th, 2022
- Just Another Manic Monday Big Tech Weak? - TheStreet - April 25th, 2022
- Big Tech hiring cements Canada's status as Silicon Valley North but there's a catch - CBC News - April 25th, 2022
- In the Battle Against Illiberalism, Don't Take Big Tech for Granted - The National Interest Online - April 25th, 2022
- Will the internet's third iteration free our virtual selves from Big Tech's control? - The New Statesman - April 25th, 2022
- Global Digital Health Market Outlook 2022 - Big Tech Using On-demand Services in Primary Care to Strengthen its Hold in Healthcare - PR Newswire - April 25th, 2022
- Antitrust Reformers Debate Partnering With Bigots To Take On 'Big Tech' - Techdirt - April 15th, 2022
- Here's the typical pay for a Big Tech worker in Austin - Austonia - April 15th, 2022
- MLB forays into the future with new tech for the old ball game - TechCrunch - April 15th, 2022
- Apple privacy protections expected to cost big tech firms $16 billion in coming year - MarTech - April 15th, 2022
- Common Knowledge: Big tech and the digital commons - Resilience - April 15th, 2022
- DuckDuckGo readying browser to compete with big tech products from Google, Apple - Washington Times - April 15th, 2022
- Big Techs battle for the metaverse will come down to ethics - Quartz - April 15th, 2022
- IonQ: Enormous Valuation And The Competition Is Big-Tech - Seeking Alpha - April 15th, 2022
- Panelists Urge Government Resist Getting Involved in Content Moderation - BroadbandBreakfast.com - April 15th, 2022
- Daily Tearsheet: CarbonPay's sustainability-focused payment card, and tech's newfound interest in carbon capture Tearsheet - Tearsheet - April 15th, 2022
- The Senate bill that has Big Tech scared - Ars Technica - April 11th, 2022
- What the Wiki Big Tech Site Tells Us About Competition - CDOTrends - April 11th, 2022
- Cathy ONeil: Big tech makes use of shame to profit from our interactions - The Guardian - April 11th, 2022
- Dr. Oz Wants To Fight Big Tech In The Senate. He Owns At Least $10 Million In Shares Of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple And Microsoft. - Forbes - April 11th, 2022
- Jaws Actor Richard Dreyfuss Says Big Tech's Censorship Is A "Despicable" Practice That Threatens Free Speech - Bounding Into Comics - April 11th, 2022
- GoTo Shares Jump After Raising $1.1 Billion in One of 2022s Biggest IPOs - Yahoo Finance - April 11th, 2022
- 'Birtherism' to the 'Big Lie': Inside Obama's fight to counter disinformation - WDJT - April 11th, 2022
- Big Abortion's Big Tech Allies Aim to Censor Pro-Lifers. They Won't Win. - Daily Signal - April 9th, 2022
- Despite railing against Big Tech and Big Pharma, records show Dr. Oz has invested millions in both - ABC News - April 9th, 2022
- Elizabeth Warrens plan to break up Big Tech and other mergers - Vox.com - April 9th, 2022
- Canada wants Big Tech to share its riches with news publishers - The Register - April 9th, 2022
- The Metaverse is a Huge Opportunity for Education. Big Tech Must Not Ruin It | Opinion - Newsweek - April 9th, 2022
- Russian Disinformation, Canadian Big Tech, WideOpenWest Sale, Broadband Emerging Leaders - BroadbandBreakfast.com - April 9th, 2022
- 'Don't Break my Prime?' Actually, it's time to move fast and break....Big Tech bobsullivan.net - Bob Sullivan.net - April 9th, 2022
- Downtown Austin is looking like itself again as big tech returns to the office - Austonia - April 9th, 2022
- These people lead sustainability within Big Tech. Here's how much power they actually have. - Protocol - April 9th, 2022
- Why Elon Musk's Twitter move is supercharging the Big Tech debate - Fox News - April 9th, 2022
- Big Tech's fast-and-dirty employment honeymoon is over as Amazon unionises - City A.M. - April 9th, 2022
- Is Big Tech 'Targeting' the Elderly a Point of Concern? - hackernoon.com - April 9th, 2022
- Why Alibaba And Other Big Tech Stocks Are Shooting Up In Hong Kong Today - Benzinga - Benzinga - April 9th, 2022
- Americans Deserve a Fair Fight Against Big Tech InsideSources - InsideSources - April 2nd, 2022
- Government tech shouldnt be the minor leagues - Protocol - April 2nd, 2022
- To Stop Online Hate, Big Tech Must Let Those Being Targeted Lead the Way - Algemeiner - April 2nd, 2022
- Big tech is fixing bugs faster. Will that influence trickle down? - CIO Dive - April 2nd, 2022
- Media and Big Tech censorship is alive and well - Washington Times - April 2nd, 2022
- Power Moves: A new focus for Lynsie Campbell and big tech names on CMU's list of honorary degree recipients - Technical.ly - April 2nd, 2022
- How Google and Amazon bankrolled a 'grassroots' activist group of small business owners to lobby against Big Tech oversight - CNBC - March 31st, 2022
- DOJ backs bills that could kneecap Big Tech - Axios - March 31st, 2022
- Watchdog Group Publishes Encyclopedia of All the Nasty Things Big Tech Has Done - Gizmodo - March 31st, 2022
- Local Tennessee officials need to regulate big tech and protect our small businesses | Opinion - Tennessean - March 31st, 2022
- Freedom to Think by Susie Alegre review the big tech threat to free thought - The Guardian - March 31st, 2022
- In a Climate Crisis, the Future Relies Alarmingly on Big Tech - The New York Times - March 31st, 2022
- S&P 500 ends higher with financials as Treasury yields jump - Reuters - March 31st, 2022
- U.S. Senate votes to move forward with Alvaro Bedoya's nomination to the FTC - Fox Business - March 31st, 2022
- Physics - Seeking Diversity When Faced with Adversity - Physics - March 29th, 2022
- A Big Swing at Big Tech - The New York Times - March 27th, 2022
- Australia to make Big Tech hand over misinformation data - Reuters - March 27th, 2022
- States Could Let Parents Sue Big Tech for Addicting Kids. Here's What That Really Means. - TIME - March 27th, 2022
- If Congress Doesn't Rein In Big Tech, Censors Will Eliminate The Right From Public Discourse - The Federalist - March 27th, 2022
- Michael Hiltzik: That big tech exodus out of California turns out to be a bust - The Denver Gazette - March 27th, 2022
- Stigler Conversation: How the Chinese Government Thinks About Big Tech - ProMarket - March 27th, 2022
- Liberals and conservatives bash Big Techs preparations for midterm elections - Washington Examiner - March 27th, 2022
- ACCC vs Big Tech: Round 10 and counting - University News: The University of Western Australia - March 27th, 2022
- Rajeev Chandrasekhar: Need to relook laws to de-risk Indian internet, make it difficult for Big Tech to be weaponised - The Indian Express - March 27th, 2022
- A Populist Attack on Big Tech - Econlib - March 4th, 2022
- Big Tech companies are harming not helping healthcare - MedCity News - March 4th, 2022
- This Big Tech company 'surprises and delights employees to keep them happy - CNBC - March 4th, 2022
- How are the big tech companies responding to the invasion of Ukraine? - Sky News - March 4th, 2022
- Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter have a Russia problem - Vox.com - March 4th, 2022
- Covid News: U.S. to Offer Covid-Fighting Tech to Other Nations - The New York Times - March 4th, 2022
- Bren with Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway on Pivot, Reverence, and What's Behind Big Tech - Brene Brown - March 4th, 2022
- The Leader podcast: Big techs role in the Ukraine conflict - Evening Standard - March 4th, 2022
- Opinion | Tech Offers a Silver Lining in Ukraine - The New York Times - March 4th, 2022
- Every Netflix original TV show and movie has BIG tech secret have you spotted it?... - The Sun - March 4th, 2022
- We were supposed to rein in Big Tech now we're making them Britain's woke police - The Telegraph - March 4th, 2022
- Report calls on feds to help level the playing field between Canadian media and big tech - CP24 Toronto's Breaking News - March 4th, 2022
- Do Federal Lawmakers Have the Stomach to Rein in Big Tech? - KQED - February 19th, 2022
- The rise of big tech may just be starting - Standard Speaker - February 19th, 2022
- Bossing it: why the women of big tech are taking over the small screen - The Guardian - February 19th, 2022
- Metas plunge is unmatched among big tech stocks in recent years - Aljazeera.com - February 19th, 2022
- His journalist daughter was killed. Now he wants to fix big tech in Congress - The Guardian - February 19th, 2022
- How big technology systems are slowing innovation - MIT Technology Review - February 19th, 2022
- Big Tech vs Reliance Industries and Paytm on data localisation row - Deccan Herald - February 19th, 2022