1
00:00:03,520 --> 00:00:07,040
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:09,680
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

3
00:00:09,720 --> 00:00:12,200
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:16,160
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud

5
00:00:16,280 --> 00:00:20,759
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Facebook just inked

6
00:00:20,760 --> 00:00:23,639
Speaker 1: a record five billion dollars settlement with the Federal Trade

7
00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:28,080
Speaker 1: Commission over privacy violations, but the FTC is apparently not

8
00:00:28,200 --> 00:00:31,840
Speaker 1: done with the social networking giant. The agency is now

9
00:00:31,880 --> 00:00:36,080
Speaker 1: investigating with their Facebook violated antitrust laws. Joining me is

10
00:00:36,159 --> 00:00:39,640
Speaker 1: leading antitrust expert Harry First, Professor at n y U

11
00:00:39,800 --> 00:00:43,400
Speaker 1: Law School. Harry, isn't it at all unusual to have

12
00:00:43,520 --> 00:00:47,400
Speaker 1: the FTC concluding one investigation on a company and then

13
00:00:47,600 --> 00:00:52,000
Speaker 1: starting another, Well, it's not necessarily unusual, and they're two

14
00:00:52,159 --> 00:00:56,320
Speaker 1: actually very separate cases. The settlements that they just reached

15
00:00:56,440 --> 00:01:01,279
Speaker 1: was for violating a twenty twelve order Facebook agreed to

16
00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:05,080
Speaker 1: with the FTC, and there was an order that revolved

17
00:01:05,120 --> 00:01:10,240
Speaker 1: around privacy issues, not around competition issues. So they're really

18
00:01:10,280 --> 00:01:13,440
Speaker 1: actually quite separate. If if we had two separate agencies,

19
00:01:13,440 --> 00:01:16,080
Speaker 1: one for privacy, one for competition, and then you'd have

20
00:01:16,120 --> 00:01:18,520
Speaker 1: a different name on the door, so I don't find

21
00:01:18,560 --> 00:01:24,800
Speaker 1: anything unexpected actually in the FTC finishing one and also

22
00:01:24,880 --> 00:01:29,200
Speaker 1: doing another, so two agencies. That brings up my next question.

23
00:01:29,520 --> 00:01:34,160
Speaker 1: How does this FTC investigation fit in with the Justice

24
00:01:34,240 --> 00:01:39,720
Speaker 1: Department's Antitrust Division escalating it's scrutiny into tech giants like

25
00:01:39,920 --> 00:01:43,320
Speaker 1: Facebook and Google. Well, that is a wonderful question, which

26
00:01:43,480 --> 00:01:45,800
Speaker 1: it may be that people at the FTC are asking

27
00:01:45,800 --> 00:01:48,840
Speaker 1: it as well. Uh, and I don't know how they've

28
00:01:48,840 --> 00:01:54,440
Speaker 1: resolved it. I find this actually surprising and a little troubling. Originally,

29
00:01:54,480 --> 00:01:57,280
Speaker 1: there have been reports that Federal Trade Commission and the

30
00:01:57,360 --> 00:02:00,880
Speaker 1: Justice Department any Trust Division, both of which have jurisdiction

31
00:02:00,960 --> 00:02:05,640
Speaker 1: and legally they can actually investigate the same party. They

32
00:02:05,680 --> 00:02:09,760
Speaker 1: can actually bring cases separately against the same party for

33
00:02:09,840 --> 00:02:13,240
Speaker 1: the same behavior, but they haven't done that. So they

34
00:02:13,280 --> 00:02:17,560
Speaker 1: try to coordinate efforts, which is sensible. And originally it

35
00:02:17,600 --> 00:02:21,680
Speaker 1: looked like they were dividing up the big tech four,

36
00:02:22,160 --> 00:02:27,359
Speaker 1: where the FTC would have jurisdiction over Facebook and Amazon

37
00:02:27,600 --> 00:02:32,600
Speaker 1: and the Justice Department over Google and Apple. But now

38
00:02:32,639 --> 00:02:35,760
Speaker 1: it looks like something has happened, and I don't quite

39
00:02:35,760 --> 00:02:39,520
Speaker 1: know what, but the Justice Department's press release, which in

40
00:02:39,600 --> 00:02:43,520
Speaker 1: itself is an unusual thing to do in any trust cases,

41
00:02:43,560 --> 00:02:47,000
Speaker 1: to say, oh, guess what we are investigating. Usually, if

42
00:02:47,040 --> 00:02:50,760
Speaker 1: you're investigating, you start investigating, you don't issue a press release.

43
00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:53,720
Speaker 1: So why did they do it? And it does appear

44
00:02:54,200 --> 00:02:56,920
Speaker 1: that they're going to investigate all four of these companies?

45
00:02:57,240 --> 00:03:01,320
Speaker 1: So this creates a risk between the two agencies, which

46
00:03:01,320 --> 00:03:05,079
Speaker 1: frankly has been going on now currently for a little while.

47
00:03:05,840 --> 00:03:10,360
Speaker 1: How much pressure is there on the antitrust enforces to

48
00:03:10,440 --> 00:03:14,520
Speaker 1: bring cases against the tech companies, not only because you

49
00:03:14,560 --> 00:03:18,000
Speaker 1: have President Trump who has expressed an interest in that,

50
00:03:18,160 --> 00:03:20,959
Speaker 1: but also you have so many people calling for their breakup.

51
00:03:21,760 --> 00:03:24,080
Speaker 1: So there are two levels to this. One is the

52
00:03:24,200 --> 00:03:27,800
Speaker 1: very interesting policy level that there seems to be a

53
00:03:27,880 --> 00:03:32,320
Speaker 1: concern across the political spectrum with the power that these

54
00:03:32,360 --> 00:03:36,000
Speaker 1: four companies now seem to be exercising. They are ubiquitous

55
00:03:36,000 --> 00:03:39,839
Speaker 1: in our lives, and generally we we expect some controls

56
00:03:39,960 --> 00:03:43,760
Speaker 1: on very big companies. It's either the government of controls

57
00:03:43,920 --> 00:03:46,320
Speaker 1: or the markets, and neither's doing it. So on a

58
00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:50,800
Speaker 1: policy level, this is I think a good development, maybe

59
00:03:50,800 --> 00:03:55,440
Speaker 1: a little surprising. The federal government has an investigated monopolies

60
00:03:55,520 --> 00:03:59,480
Speaker 1: for two decades since the Microsoft case. Really, so in

61
00:03:59,520 --> 00:04:03,440
Speaker 1: that sense it's a good thing. The other part of

62
00:04:03,480 --> 00:04:06,680
Speaker 1: it is what are the politics for the Justice Department,

63
00:04:06,680 --> 00:04:10,560
Speaker 1: and that it's a little hard to pull apart and

64
00:04:10,880 --> 00:04:15,640
Speaker 1: perhaps not all that good and related more to political

65
00:04:15,760 --> 00:04:19,320
Speaker 1: vendetta than to any trust policy. I don't know that

66
00:04:19,440 --> 00:04:21,600
Speaker 1: for sure, but I read the tweets as you do

67
00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:24,960
Speaker 1: and as everyone does, and it is a little concerning.

68
00:04:25,440 --> 00:04:28,719
Speaker 1: And it seems to me that any trust people have

69
00:04:29,279 --> 00:04:32,520
Speaker 1: avoided that and tried to keep this as a matter

70
00:04:32,640 --> 00:04:37,400
Speaker 1: of law. But I worry with this most recent announcement

71
00:04:37,480 --> 00:04:41,360
Speaker 1: by General Barr that that line is fading on these

72
00:04:41,440 --> 00:04:44,960
Speaker 1: very big companies. They're also big. What would make the

73
00:04:45,040 --> 00:04:48,080
Speaker 1: difference between bringing a case and not bringing a case

74
00:04:48,120 --> 00:04:50,839
Speaker 1: against one of them? Well, they really do have to

75
00:04:50,880 --> 00:04:53,560
Speaker 1: investigate and find out exactly how these companies are put

76
00:04:53,600 --> 00:04:57,760
Speaker 1: together in what they've done. So these investigations take time,

77
00:04:57,920 --> 00:05:00,840
Speaker 1: and with big companies like this, have to look into

78
00:05:00,880 --> 00:05:03,159
Speaker 1: a lot and they want to see whether they've engaged

79
00:05:03,200 --> 00:05:07,720
Speaker 1: in behavior basically that's excluded their competitors and or raised

80
00:05:07,760 --> 00:05:10,520
Speaker 1: price to consumers. So that's what they'll be looking for.

81
00:05:11,040 --> 00:05:13,839
Speaker 1: Should take time, and they've got to work this into

82
00:05:13,880 --> 00:05:16,640
Speaker 1: a good legal theory. Let's turn for a moment to

83
00:05:16,720 --> 00:05:18,960
Speaker 1: the news of the day, because something seems to be

84
00:05:18,960 --> 00:05:23,760
Speaker 1: happening in anti trust all the time lately, isn't it's

85
00:05:23,800 --> 00:05:27,719
Speaker 1: certainly the in area now, So you're teaching the right

86
00:05:27,760 --> 00:05:31,760
Speaker 1: all my students, Right. The Justice Department has approved T

87
00:05:32,000 --> 00:05:34,880
Speaker 1: Mobile's acquisition of Sprint. It's a deal that's going to

88
00:05:34,960 --> 00:05:39,240
Speaker 1: reshape the wireless industry. It combines the number three and

89
00:05:39,279 --> 00:05:42,760
Speaker 1: the number four wireless carriers in the country was rejected

90
00:05:42,839 --> 00:05:47,480
Speaker 1: under the Obama administration. Do the remedies the Justice Department

91
00:05:47,640 --> 00:05:52,279
Speaker 1: has put in place take care of antitrust concerns? Well,

92
00:05:52,480 --> 00:05:54,560
Speaker 1: this is going to be a key question going forward,

93
00:05:54,640 --> 00:05:58,040
Speaker 1: although maybe not the only question. It's always difficult to

94
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:02,679
Speaker 1: create a new competitor out of some other company, and

95
00:06:03,000 --> 00:06:05,119
Speaker 1: that seems to be what the Justice Department is trying

96
00:06:05,160 --> 00:06:08,640
Speaker 1: to do. Um We see it often in merger cases,

97
00:06:09,200 --> 00:06:12,400
Speaker 1: and most of the time this fails. So I think

98
00:06:12,400 --> 00:06:15,240
Speaker 1: people are going to be looking skeptically at exactly what's

99
00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:20,200
Speaker 1: been created. Four to three merger is generally your instinct

100
00:06:20,360 --> 00:06:25,479
Speaker 1: is that's really a lot less competition. So are you

101
00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:30,200
Speaker 1: really going to create a four firm industry now by

102
00:06:30,240 --> 00:06:33,359
Speaker 1: throwing some assets at a different company and hoping it

103
00:06:33,400 --> 00:06:35,960
Speaker 1: will work. So I think there's gonna be some skepticism

104
00:06:35,960 --> 00:06:40,520
Speaker 1: about whether this deal is really effective in maintaining competition

105
00:06:40,520 --> 00:06:43,200
Speaker 1: in this industry. There's a lawsuit by a group of

106
00:06:43,240 --> 00:06:46,200
Speaker 1: states that say the deal should be blocked. Is that

107
00:06:46,279 --> 00:06:50,279
Speaker 1: a big obstacle? Still, it is a legal obstacle. Yes,

108
00:06:50,800 --> 00:06:56,520
Speaker 1: that's litigation, which my understanding is will continue. And again

109
00:06:56,560 --> 00:07:00,480
Speaker 1: this is another example of tension in the relationship between

110
00:07:00,520 --> 00:07:04,880
Speaker 1: the Justice Department and other anti trust enforcers. First, it's

111
00:07:04,920 --> 00:07:08,160
Speaker 1: the FTC. This case, it's the states. These states are

112
00:07:08,160 --> 00:07:10,840
Speaker 1: pretty serious about this case, actually put a lot of

113
00:07:10,880 --> 00:07:13,920
Speaker 1: work into it, and I think they'll seriously examine whether

114
00:07:14,040 --> 00:07:18,080
Speaker 1: this is a genuine remedy or whether still we would

115
00:07:18,080 --> 00:07:21,280
Speaker 1: predict that competition may be lessened in the future. And

116
00:07:21,320 --> 00:07:25,280
Speaker 1: that's the question the law requires courts to answer. That's

117
00:07:25,280 --> 00:07:28,120
Speaker 1: Harry First, a professor at n y U Law School.

118
00:07:29,840 --> 00:07:32,800
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

119
00:07:32,800 --> 00:07:36,560
Speaker 1: subscribe and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

120
00:07:36,640 --> 00:07:40,520
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brasso,

121
00:07:41,000 --> 00:07:42,280
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg,