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 Podcasts, SoundCloud

5
00:00:16,280 --> 00:00:20,240
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Facebook is joining

6
00:00:20,280 --> 00:00:24,280
Speaker 1: Google in the crosshairs of state attorneys general investigating possible

7
00:00:24,320 --> 00:00:28,080
Speaker 1: anti trust violations, adding to the regulatory headaches of the

8
00:00:28,120 --> 00:00:32,240
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley giants that have been widely criticized by politicians

9
00:00:32,240 --> 00:00:36,120
Speaker 1: from both parties over their market dominance. Joining me is

10
00:00:36,200 --> 00:00:39,199
Speaker 1: noted anti trust expert Harry First, a professor at n

11
00:00:39,320 --> 00:00:41,920
Speaker 1: y U Law School. So, Harry, the New York a

12
00:00:42,080 --> 00:00:46,320
Speaker 1: g is leading this multi state bipartis an investigation eight

13
00:00:46,400 --> 00:00:48,839
Speaker 1: states in d C. What are they going to be

14
00:00:48,880 --> 00:00:52,840
Speaker 1: looking into? Well, thanks first of all June for having

15
00:00:52,840 --> 00:00:55,680
Speaker 1: me on what they're going to be looking into our

16
00:00:55,760 --> 00:01:00,920
Speaker 1: violations basically federal anti trust law, although they can also

17
00:01:00,960 --> 00:01:05,240
Speaker 1: be investigating state any trust flow violations, and the focus

18
00:01:05,319 --> 00:01:09,760
Speaker 1: is going to be on competition issues. So this isn't

19
00:01:09,880 --> 00:01:13,600
Speaker 1: about fake news, it's not about privacy per se, but

20
00:01:13,680 --> 00:01:17,880
Speaker 1: it's about Google. I'm sorry, I slipped. So next week

21
00:01:18,040 --> 00:01:23,720
Speaker 1: true market domination in social media, because we're expecting that

22
00:01:23,800 --> 00:01:27,240
Speaker 1: next week they are going to announce their multi state

23
00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:32,480
Speaker 1: investigation into Google. Correct. So now the FDC is already

24
00:01:32,520 --> 00:01:37,040
Speaker 1: investigating Facebook, the Justice Department is going to be investigating Google,

25
00:01:37,120 --> 00:01:40,200
Speaker 1: the House Antitrust Panel seems to be investigating all the

26
00:01:40,240 --> 00:01:47,000
Speaker 1: tech giants. Are these multi state investigations duplicative in any sense? Well,

27
00:01:47,120 --> 00:01:49,280
Speaker 1: we have a system in the United States where we

28
00:01:49,320 --> 00:01:53,320
Speaker 1: have actually multiple anti trust enforces. The Federal Trade Commission,

29
00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:56,240
Speaker 1: for example, and the Justice Department have a story to

30
00:01:56,280 --> 00:02:00,280
Speaker 1: investigate the same things on the federal level, and states also,

31
00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:05,440
Speaker 1: for many years have authority to engage in any trust investigations. Now,

32
00:02:05,760 --> 00:02:10,400
Speaker 1: obviously there can be some potential for duplication. So often

33
00:02:10,440 --> 00:02:15,560
Speaker 1: the parties these investigative agencies work together, particularly the federal

34
00:02:15,880 --> 00:02:18,880
Speaker 1: agencies and the states. So we have yet to see

35
00:02:18,919 --> 00:02:22,160
Speaker 1: exactly whether that cooperation is going to emerge. We do

36
00:02:22,240 --> 00:02:26,680
Speaker 1: see the states working together. They could technically each file separately,

37
00:02:26,720 --> 00:02:30,960
Speaker 1: but they are operating together. So it's true. The FTC

38
00:02:31,080 --> 00:02:34,800
Speaker 1: had announced earlier that it's investigating Facebook, and it's not

39
00:02:34,919 --> 00:02:39,320
Speaker 1: clear whether the state's investigation is being coordinated with the

40
00:02:39,400 --> 00:02:43,280
Speaker 1: FTC or is separate. So is it possible then that

41
00:02:43,400 --> 00:02:48,080
Speaker 1: the Feds won't find antitrust violations but the states will,

42
00:02:48,240 --> 00:02:51,679
Speaker 1: or vice versa, and then there'll be a trial by

43
00:02:51,800 --> 00:02:56,720
Speaker 1: one of these entities. Yes, we love competition the United States,

44
00:02:57,000 --> 00:03:01,560
Speaker 1: and we have competition enforcements. So enforcers is like anybody,

45
00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:05,840
Speaker 1: don't always agree. And there are occasions where the states

46
00:03:05,880 --> 00:03:09,720
Speaker 1: may take one view and the federal enforcers may take others,

47
00:03:09,880 --> 00:03:12,639
Speaker 1: or some states may take one view and others take

48
00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:15,560
Speaker 1: a different view. So right now, in fact, there's some

49
00:03:15,680 --> 00:03:20,000
Speaker 1: litigation involving the Sprint T Mobile merger where the states

50
00:03:20,000 --> 00:03:23,080
Speaker 1: have filed suit but the federal government has not, and

51
00:03:23,080 --> 00:03:25,960
Speaker 1: the federal government is apparently going to settle that. So

52
00:03:26,280 --> 00:03:30,800
Speaker 1: again there's a long history of this possibility and in

53
00:03:30,880 --> 00:03:33,800
Speaker 1: the end of court settle it as a legal matter.

54
00:03:33,960 --> 00:03:37,600
Speaker 1: So that seems fine too. So the FDC chairman has

55
00:03:37,600 --> 00:03:40,960
Speaker 1: said he's prepared to break up Facebook or any other

56
00:03:41,080 --> 00:03:45,720
Speaker 1: major tech platforms if necessary. Is that something that only

57
00:03:45,960 --> 00:03:50,000
Speaker 1: a federal agency can suggest or could the states suggest

58
00:03:50,040 --> 00:03:53,080
Speaker 1: that in some way? So the states could suggest it

59
00:03:53,120 --> 00:03:57,040
Speaker 1: as well. I like the if possible or if necessary,

60
00:03:57,320 --> 00:03:59,920
Speaker 1: We'll see there's a lot to be seen in my

61
00:04:00,000 --> 00:04:03,440
Speaker 1: Microsoft for example, UM when the states were involved in

62
00:04:03,440 --> 00:04:10,920
Speaker 1: that litigation, they did that that remedy. Now, Jack Landry,

63
00:04:10,960 --> 00:04:13,520
Speaker 1: the Louisiana AG told The Wall Street Journal in a

64
00:04:13,560 --> 00:04:17,440
Speaker 1: recent interview that the most meaningful litigation to check companies

65
00:04:17,440 --> 00:04:20,160
Speaker 1: over the last thirty years seems to be starting out

66
00:04:20,240 --> 00:04:23,200
Speaker 1: more and more from the state ages. Do you agree

67
00:04:23,240 --> 00:04:26,560
Speaker 1: with that, Well, it's not surprising a state ag might

68
00:04:26,600 --> 00:04:30,760
Speaker 1: say that, I don't. In the end, the states have

69
00:04:30,960 --> 00:04:35,680
Speaker 1: engaged in important litigation. The last important monopoly case was

70
00:04:35,880 --> 00:04:40,200
Speaker 1: against Microsoft, and the States and the Justice Department proceeded together,

71
00:04:40,760 --> 00:04:43,919
Speaker 1: not separately. So the states are very important in this

72
00:04:44,040 --> 00:04:48,120
Speaker 1: and sometimes push the Feds to act. Sometimes the Feds

73
00:04:48,160 --> 00:04:50,320
Speaker 1: don't do it, and the States get out and do

74
00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:54,080
Speaker 1: it themselves. So they've been very important, But the real

75
00:04:54,160 --> 00:04:57,720
Speaker 1: resources often in these cases are on the federal level,

76
00:04:58,040 --> 00:05:02,880
Speaker 1: where they have just more and power. We have talked before,

77
00:05:02,920 --> 00:05:06,120
Speaker 1: Harry about how antitrust seems to be an area of

78
00:05:06,200 --> 00:05:10,120
Speaker 1: law that's really popping lately. And as I was preparing

79
00:05:10,120 --> 00:05:12,800
Speaker 1: for this segment, a new headline popped up that the

80
00:05:12,960 --> 00:05:21,080
Speaker 1: Justice Department is launching an antitrust investigation into four automakers Ford, Honda, BMW,

81
00:05:21,160 --> 00:05:24,960
Speaker 1: and Volkswagen who made an independent agreement with California on

82
00:05:25,120 --> 00:05:31,400
Speaker 1: vehicle emission standards. How might that violate anti trust laws? Well,

83
00:05:31,440 --> 00:05:35,160
Speaker 1: that's a good question, and I'm not sure that it does. Um.

84
00:05:35,560 --> 00:05:39,560
Speaker 1: The news report indicates that the Justice Department is investigating,

85
00:05:39,680 --> 00:05:42,560
Speaker 1: so we don't really know all the facts from what

86
00:05:42,680 --> 00:05:46,600
Speaker 1: seems to be on the public record. UM, I'm not

87
00:05:46,640 --> 00:05:49,440
Speaker 1: sure how it's going to violate or if it does

88
00:05:49,560 --> 00:05:52,919
Speaker 1: violate the anti trust laws. There's no liability, for example,

89
00:05:53,360 --> 00:05:58,760
Speaker 1: when competitors petition the government or involved with the government regulators,

90
00:05:59,080 --> 00:06:03,520
Speaker 1: even when seek anti competitive ends. So the Supreme Court

91
00:06:03,520 --> 00:06:06,800
Speaker 1: has been very clear with this doctrine, and so far

92
00:06:06,839 --> 00:06:09,600
Speaker 1: as I can tell, that seems to be what's happening here.

93
00:06:09,640 --> 00:06:14,159
Speaker 1: So I don't know. There is some precedent for going

94
00:06:14,200 --> 00:06:18,080
Speaker 1: against automobile makers for trying to sort of fix technology.

95
00:06:18,440 --> 00:06:22,080
Speaker 1: That suit was followed in nineteen nine against the major

96
00:06:22,120 --> 00:06:27,280
Speaker 1: automobile companies for trying to fix progress in anti smog

97
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:33,000
Speaker 1: pollution devices. So possible, we'll have to see what facts emerge.

98
00:06:33,279 --> 00:06:35,480
Speaker 1: I was wondering if this had anything to do with

99
00:06:35,560 --> 00:06:41,560
Speaker 1: the continual battles between the Trump administration and California over emissions.

100
00:06:42,600 --> 00:06:45,480
Speaker 1: Me too, and I think anyone would wonder this, and

101
00:06:45,560 --> 00:06:49,480
Speaker 1: it's unfortunate that this will cast. What the Trump administration

102
00:06:49,560 --> 00:06:53,680
Speaker 1: does is cast a pall over potentially legitimate anti trust

103
00:06:53,800 --> 00:06:57,800
Speaker 1: enforcement by making everything seemed political, and that's a bad development.

104
00:06:57,839 --> 00:07:00,520
Speaker 1: I think. Always a pleasure to have you on, Harry,

105
00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:03,400
Speaker 1: Thanks so much. That's Harry Ferrester, professor at n y

106
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:09,680
Speaker 1: U Law School and a noted antitrust expert. Thanks for

107
00:07:09,760 --> 00:07:13,000
Speaker 1: listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and

108
00:07:13,080 --> 00:07:16,320
Speaker 1: listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on

109
00:07:16,360 --> 00:07:21,120
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is

110
00:07:21,160 --> 00:07:21,760
Speaker 1: Bloomberg