WEBVTT - Tech's Antitrust Problem

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.800
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.

0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:14.800
<v Speaker 1>Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host,

0:00:14.960 --> 0:00:17.920
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I Heart Radio

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.760
<v Speaker 1>and a love of all things tech. And in the

0:00:20.880 --> 0:00:24.000
<v Speaker 1>last few years, there have been an increasing number of

0:00:24.000 --> 0:00:28.840
<v Speaker 1>discussions around the world really regarding the reach and practices

0:00:29.480 --> 0:00:34.040
<v Speaker 1>of certain big tech companies, you know, the ones like

0:00:34.280 --> 0:00:39.199
<v Speaker 1>Google and Facebook and Amazon Apple, And this has been

0:00:39.280 --> 0:00:42.960
<v Speaker 1>leading to allegations that companies like these are using their

0:00:43.000 --> 0:00:48.240
<v Speaker 1>size and influence to suppress competition from others. And anti

0:00:48.240 --> 0:00:53.159
<v Speaker 1>competitiveness is a big no no, particularly for large companies,

0:00:53.200 --> 0:00:56.080
<v Speaker 1>and it puts these companies in danger of being deemed

0:00:56.160 --> 0:01:01.160
<v Speaker 1>a monopoly, which is an even bigger no no. So

0:01:01.880 --> 0:01:04.479
<v Speaker 1>Google and Facebook have been on alert for a few

0:01:04.560 --> 0:01:09.680
<v Speaker 1>years now, but more so and increasingly so in recent years.

0:01:10.240 --> 0:01:13.600
<v Speaker 1>And today I thought I would talk about antitrust issues,

0:01:14.040 --> 0:01:17.160
<v Speaker 1>explain where those ideas kind of come from, talk a

0:01:17.240 --> 0:01:21.000
<v Speaker 1>bit about an earlier case involving Microsoft from a couple

0:01:21.080 --> 0:01:24.200
<v Speaker 1>of decades ago, and then chat a bit about the

0:01:24.240 --> 0:01:27.480
<v Speaker 1>current situation. So this episode is less about the actual

0:01:27.560 --> 0:01:32.280
<v Speaker 1>technology and more about how corporations can dominate an industry.

0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:37.200
<v Speaker 1>So thoroughly that they become the center of scrutiny. So

0:01:37.280 --> 0:01:41.759
<v Speaker 1>to start off, let's learn about monopolies and antitrust laws.

0:01:41.880 --> 0:01:45.320
<v Speaker 1>And I'll warn you learning about antitrust laws on its

0:01:45.319 --> 0:01:48.400
<v Speaker 1>own is not enough, because interpretations of the law have

0:01:48.520 --> 0:01:51.600
<v Speaker 1>shifted over the more than a century since they were

0:01:51.640 --> 0:01:55.240
<v Speaker 1>first drafted in the United States. The courts might interpret

0:01:55.360 --> 0:01:59.240
<v Speaker 1>laws one way in one generation and a very different

0:01:59.240 --> 0:02:02.760
<v Speaker 1>way later on, which makes this a lot less straightforward

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:06.280
<v Speaker 1>of a topic than technology tends to be. Before I

0:02:06.360 --> 0:02:09.440
<v Speaker 1>dive in too far into this whole thing, I have

0:02:09.520 --> 0:02:12.560
<v Speaker 1>to give a shout out to Laura Phillips Sawyer, who

0:02:12.560 --> 0:02:17.520
<v Speaker 1>wrote a great paper titled US Antitrust Policy in Historical

0:02:17.600 --> 0:02:21.480
<v Speaker 1>Perspective for the Harvard Business School. The paper is available

0:02:21.520 --> 0:02:24.520
<v Speaker 1>to read for free online and it goes into great

0:02:24.560 --> 0:02:30.200
<v Speaker 1>detail about how antitrust legislation and its enforcement have evolved

0:02:30.240 --> 0:02:33.520
<v Speaker 1>in the United States over the years. I highly recommend it,

0:02:33.720 --> 0:02:36.200
<v Speaker 1>and most of what I have to say in this

0:02:36.360 --> 0:02:39.320
<v Speaker 1>section of the episode is kind of a high level

0:02:39.480 --> 0:02:44.040
<v Speaker 1>overview of what Sawyer has to say. Our story begins

0:02:44.280 --> 0:02:46.880
<v Speaker 1>in the United States in the latter half of the

0:02:46.960 --> 0:02:51.280
<v Speaker 1>nineteenth century. Throughout the eighteen hundreds. Certain industries in the

0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:54.840
<v Speaker 1>US came to be dominated by a small handful of

0:02:54.919 --> 0:03:00.239
<v Speaker 1>increasingly large businesses. Some of these businesses banded to other

0:03:00.400 --> 0:03:05.880
<v Speaker 1>with one another, combining their interests into a single entity. Now,

0:03:05.919 --> 0:03:10.359
<v Speaker 1>these entities were called trusts. The idea is that multiple

0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:13.720
<v Speaker 1>property owners create a trust in an effort to build

0:03:13.760 --> 0:03:18.000
<v Speaker 1>a unified management structure. The owners appoint one or more

0:03:18.120 --> 0:03:22.560
<v Speaker 1>trustees to serve as a manager of the owner's interests,

0:03:22.600 --> 0:03:26.520
<v Speaker 1>and each owner retains shares in the trust. From a

0:03:26.560 --> 0:03:31.240
<v Speaker 1>structural standpoint, a trust could either be a single unified company,

0:03:31.440 --> 0:03:34.040
<v Speaker 1>or it could be set up as a conglomeration of

0:03:34.120 --> 0:03:38.680
<v Speaker 1>multiple firms or even a cartel. Now, on the face

0:03:38.760 --> 0:03:42.160
<v Speaker 1>of it, there's not a lot here that immediately jumps

0:03:42.200 --> 0:03:46.720
<v Speaker 1>out as being an enormous problem. Just at at casual glance,

0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:51.160
<v Speaker 1>we're talking mainly about the organizational and leadership structure of

0:03:51.240 --> 0:03:55.720
<v Speaker 1>a business. But some particularly enterprising business owners were forming

0:03:55.760 --> 0:03:59.880
<v Speaker 1>trusts in an effort to dominate an industry and fix

0:04:00.120 --> 0:04:04.120
<v Speaker 1>prices without fear of any competition. Because they were already

0:04:04.200 --> 0:04:08.880
<v Speaker 1>so big they could out compete everyone else. They could

0:04:09.120 --> 0:04:12.360
<v Speaker 1>suppress competition. There will be no external forces in the

0:04:12.360 --> 0:04:16.560
<v Speaker 1>market to affect the business owner's decisions, and so they

0:04:16.560 --> 0:04:21.839
<v Speaker 1>could practice predatory and unethical price fixing strategies with impunity. Now,

0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:25.600
<v Speaker 1>to use a simple analogy, let's say you grow up

0:04:25.640 --> 0:04:29.359
<v Speaker 1>in a small town and it has a single candy

0:04:29.440 --> 0:04:32.840
<v Speaker 1>shop in the entire town. There's no other place in

0:04:32.960 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 1>town that sells candy. The next closest candy store is

0:04:37.560 --> 0:04:40.160
<v Speaker 1>a hundred miles away. So if you want candy, you

0:04:40.279 --> 0:04:43.640
<v Speaker 1>got one place you can go to. The candy shop owner,

0:04:44.360 --> 0:04:47.960
<v Speaker 1>let's call him slug Worth, realizes that he has a

0:04:48.000 --> 0:04:52.240
<v Speaker 1>monopoly on candies in this town, and so he marks

0:04:52.320 --> 0:04:55.080
<v Speaker 1>up the price of every candy to five times what

0:04:55.200 --> 0:04:59.160
<v Speaker 1>it would normally cost in a competitive market. But there's

0:04:59.200 --> 0:05:01.920
<v Speaker 1>no alternative for you in this small town. You either

0:05:02.040 --> 0:05:05.279
<v Speaker 1>pay five times what you should pay if you were

0:05:05.320 --> 0:05:09.919
<v Speaker 1>somewhere else, or you just go without. That would stink. Now,

0:05:10.120 --> 0:05:15.400
<v Speaker 1>candy is arguably anyway a frivolous and an important concern,

0:05:15.520 --> 0:05:18.800
<v Speaker 1>But in the late eighteen hundreds, the United States was

0:05:18.960 --> 0:05:23.240
<v Speaker 1>seeing industries that were far more critical consolidate under this

0:05:23.440 --> 0:05:27.320
<v Speaker 1>trust strategy. And just to be clear, concerned about anti

0:05:27.320 --> 0:05:31.280
<v Speaker 1>competitive business practices dates back much further, but the late

0:05:31.279 --> 0:05:34.760
<v Speaker 1>eighteen hundreds is where it became a crisis, and there

0:05:34.800 --> 0:05:38.440
<v Speaker 1>were many contributing factors that made this possible. For one thing,

0:05:38.760 --> 0:05:43.000
<v Speaker 1>the United States was enjoying the benefits of the Industrial Revolution,

0:05:43.080 --> 0:05:47.680
<v Speaker 1>which had taken place earlier that century. Transportation and communication

0:05:47.720 --> 0:05:50.600
<v Speaker 1>networks were connecting the various parts of the country together.

0:05:51.120 --> 0:05:54.160
<v Speaker 1>In addition, in the eighteen seventies, the United States went

0:05:54.160 --> 0:05:57.719
<v Speaker 1>through an economic recession on the market side, with a

0:05:57.760 --> 0:06:03.120
<v Speaker 1>deflationary spiral that lowered demand and thus lowered prices, and

0:06:03.160 --> 0:06:06.920
<v Speaker 1>this forced several smaller companies in various industries out of business.

0:06:07.000 --> 0:06:12.200
<v Speaker 1>They couldn't cover operating expenses and stay viable. Arguably, forming

0:06:12.279 --> 0:06:15.800
<v Speaker 1>trusts was a necessity in that kind of economy, as

0:06:15.880 --> 0:06:20.039
<v Speaker 1>individually companies were finding it difficult to stay afloat. Banding

0:06:20.080 --> 0:06:23.159
<v Speaker 1>together increasing the scale and scope of the business was

0:06:23.200 --> 0:06:26.880
<v Speaker 1>a potential solution to this problem. For American consumers, things

0:06:27.040 --> 0:06:30.599
<v Speaker 1>weren't nearly so bleak because wages were on the rise,

0:06:30.800 --> 0:06:33.599
<v Speaker 1>prices were low, and there was an abundance of goods

0:06:33.640 --> 0:06:36.640
<v Speaker 1>on the market. There was a general feeling that big

0:06:36.680 --> 0:06:40.039
<v Speaker 1>business could be a potential problem down the road, but

0:06:40.320 --> 0:06:42.960
<v Speaker 1>there was a lot of disagreement regarding how to protect

0:06:43.000 --> 0:06:49.039
<v Speaker 1>citizens and politics from that outcome. One particularly important industry

0:06:49.040 --> 0:06:50.880
<v Speaker 1>in the United States at this time and still to

0:06:50.920 --> 0:06:55.359
<v Speaker 1>this day, was oil. John D. Rockefeller founded the Standard

0:06:55.400 --> 0:06:58.920
<v Speaker 1>Oil Company in the eighteen seventies and his business was,

0:06:59.440 --> 0:07:04.839
<v Speaker 1>to put it lightly, phenomenally successful, and in eight two,

0:07:04.960 --> 0:07:09.800
<v Speaker 1>an attorney for the company named SCT Dodd created a

0:07:09.880 --> 0:07:13.960
<v Speaker 1>trust of oil refiners. The goal was to set prices

0:07:14.080 --> 0:07:17.480
<v Speaker 1>and to control supply and at the same time find

0:07:17.520 --> 0:07:22.640
<v Speaker 1>ways around pesky tax laws and regulations. Other trusts and

0:07:22.720 --> 0:07:26.400
<v Speaker 1>other industries started to follow suit, and the United States

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:31.200
<v Speaker 1>saw a trend of large companies consolidating economic power. Now,

0:07:31.240 --> 0:07:35.320
<v Speaker 1>generally speaking, this can be a bad thing. Consolidating economic

0:07:35.320 --> 0:07:37.960
<v Speaker 1>power means that more of that economic power goes to

0:07:38.080 --> 0:07:41.920
<v Speaker 1>a smaller number of entities, and it leaves many others

0:07:42.160 --> 0:07:45.200
<v Speaker 1>without very much power. And companies do not tend to

0:07:45.240 --> 0:07:48.960
<v Speaker 1>be the most egalitarian with their profits or their power.

0:07:49.440 --> 0:07:52.640
<v Speaker 1>A company's purpose ultimately is to make money for the

0:07:52.680 --> 0:07:56.400
<v Speaker 1>company's owners, whether it's a private company or a publicly

0:07:56.440 --> 0:08:00.680
<v Speaker 1>traded one. On top of that, the consolidated hour would

0:08:00.720 --> 0:08:03.320
<v Speaker 1>mean that these companies would be able to push around

0:08:03.640 --> 0:08:07.880
<v Speaker 1>smaller companies, forcing them to either follow suit or go

0:08:07.960 --> 0:08:11.240
<v Speaker 1>out of business. For example, Standard Oil might tie up

0:08:11.360 --> 0:08:15.760
<v Speaker 1>enough oil refiners with exclusive agreements that would leave smaller

0:08:15.760 --> 0:08:19.240
<v Speaker 1>oil companies no oil refiner companies to work with. They

0:08:19.480 --> 0:08:22.160
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't have anyone that they could partner with because they

0:08:22.200 --> 0:08:25.640
<v Speaker 1>were all tied up with this much bigger company. That

0:08:25.680 --> 0:08:29.360
<v Speaker 1>would be an anti competitive practice. There was also a

0:08:29.440 --> 0:08:33.440
<v Speaker 1>very real fear, and as it turns out, a justified fear,

0:08:33.920 --> 0:08:36.760
<v Speaker 1>that wealthy companies would start to pour some of that

0:08:36.880 --> 0:08:40.559
<v Speaker 1>wealth into influencing politics in an effort to make things

0:08:40.640 --> 0:08:45.640
<v Speaker 1>even more beneficial to the company and its shareholders, often

0:08:45.679 --> 0:08:48.640
<v Speaker 1>at the expense of others, like I don't know, the

0:08:48.679 --> 0:08:53.800
<v Speaker 1>average taxpayer. The sense was these companies would dedicate resources

0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:58.720
<v Speaker 1>to fight back politically against various restraints and regulations that

0:08:58.760 --> 0:09:02.559
<v Speaker 1>were meant to protect fair or trade practices. Some states

0:09:02.840 --> 0:09:06.400
<v Speaker 1>began to pass antitrust laws in an effort to reverse

0:09:06.800 --> 0:09:09.920
<v Speaker 1>or at the very least slow this trend, calling for

0:09:10.000 --> 0:09:13.640
<v Speaker 1>the need to support competition, which would prevent any one

0:09:13.760 --> 0:09:17.600
<v Speaker 1>company from controlling the price and supply of critical commodities

0:09:17.640 --> 0:09:22.880
<v Speaker 1>like oil or steel. But these were local responses. As

0:09:22.920 --> 0:09:26.880
<v Speaker 1>I mentioned, the United States had recently transformed as railroads

0:09:26.960 --> 0:09:31.520
<v Speaker 1>crossed the country and telegraph lines crossed state lines. Business

0:09:31.640 --> 0:09:35.600
<v Speaker 1>was not confined to within a state's borders, and so

0:09:35.720 --> 0:09:39.360
<v Speaker 1>responses to this threat needed to go beyond the state level.

0:09:39.760 --> 0:09:44.160
<v Speaker 1>This led to the Sherman Antitrust Act of eighteen ninety.

0:09:44.520 --> 0:09:47.319
<v Speaker 1>The United States federal government passed the Act in an

0:09:47.320 --> 0:09:51.360
<v Speaker 1>effort to put some restrictions on trusts. The Department of

0:09:51.480 --> 0:09:55.400
<v Speaker 1>Justice could pursue litigation against companies that were practicing anti

0:09:55.400 --> 0:10:00.840
<v Speaker 1>competitive strategies or attempting to monopolize markets. The Sherman Act

0:10:00.920 --> 0:10:05.559
<v Speaker 1>also allowed for private litigation cases and civil lawsuits against

0:10:05.600 --> 0:10:08.920
<v Speaker 1>these companies. As it would turn out, the Act didn't

0:10:09.000 --> 0:10:14.160
<v Speaker 1>quite go far enough and mostly restated common law and

0:10:14.320 --> 0:10:18.960
<v Speaker 1>became more of a mild inconvenience to many of the trusts.

0:10:19.320 --> 0:10:22.280
<v Speaker 1>The US government would go on to pass multiple amendments

0:10:22.360 --> 0:10:24.920
<v Speaker 1>to that law to make it more effective and robust,

0:10:25.360 --> 0:10:27.960
<v Speaker 1>and the US government would also recognize that needed an

0:10:28.000 --> 0:10:31.600
<v Speaker 1>agency with more authority to oversee trade within the country,

0:10:31.960 --> 0:10:35.600
<v Speaker 1>and the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, would be formed

0:10:35.640 --> 0:10:40.040
<v Speaker 1>in nineteen fourteen. The US government would add more laws

0:10:40.080 --> 0:10:44.000
<v Speaker 1>to deal with trade issues like anti competitiveness and monopolies,

0:10:44.240 --> 0:10:46.960
<v Speaker 1>and on more than one occasion, the U. S Government

0:10:47.000 --> 0:10:51.520
<v Speaker 1>has forced certain companies to break apart in two separate entities.

0:10:51.920 --> 0:10:54.840
<v Speaker 1>There are numerous examples, but a really big one in

0:10:54.840 --> 0:10:57.719
<v Speaker 1>the tech sector was A T and T, which in

0:10:57.760 --> 0:11:01.120
<v Speaker 1>the nineteen eighties was forced to spin off its local

0:11:01.200 --> 0:11:06.520
<v Speaker 1>telephone service companies into seven Baby Bells, so called baby Bells,

0:11:06.520 --> 0:11:08.720
<v Speaker 1>since A T and T was also known as mob

0:11:08.800 --> 0:11:12.320
<v Speaker 1>Bell Bell because of Alexander Graham Bell, who was often

0:11:12.360 --> 0:11:15.800
<v Speaker 1>credited with inventing the telephone, though that story itself is

0:11:15.800 --> 0:11:19.679
<v Speaker 1>complicated and off topic. By the way, most of those

0:11:19.720 --> 0:11:24.199
<v Speaker 1>companies that were split off would over time, through mergers

0:11:24.200 --> 0:11:27.280
<v Speaker 1>and acquisitions, come back together with A T and T,

0:11:27.559 --> 0:11:30.840
<v Speaker 1>So I'm not I'm not really sure what good it

0:11:30.880 --> 0:11:34.280
<v Speaker 1>did in the long run. By the nineteen seventies, the

0:11:34.400 --> 0:11:38.920
<v Speaker 1>interpretation of antitrust law had changed. Like I said earlier,

0:11:39.240 --> 0:11:42.000
<v Speaker 1>the courts have taken a different approach to interpreting what

0:11:42.200 --> 0:11:47.520
<v Speaker 1>antitrust law is over the various generations, and part of

0:11:47.559 --> 0:11:50.520
<v Speaker 1>the reason for this is that the original laws were

0:11:50.640 --> 0:11:55.720
<v Speaker 1>fairly vague and thus open to multiple interpretations. For many years,

0:11:56.120 --> 0:11:59.640
<v Speaker 1>the main focus on antitrust law was that large companies

0:11:59.720 --> 0:12:04.120
<v Speaker 1>could practice anti competitive behaviors that could hurt smaller businesses,

0:12:04.160 --> 0:12:06.800
<v Speaker 1>and that's a bad thing. That's something that we should prevent.

0:12:07.280 --> 0:12:11.800
<v Speaker 1>So think of a company like Walmart or more recently Amazon.

0:12:12.040 --> 0:12:15.760
<v Speaker 1>A company like that with enough scale and resources could

0:12:15.800 --> 0:12:18.400
<v Speaker 1>come into a region and offer up goods at a

0:12:18.480 --> 0:12:21.960
<v Speaker 1>lower cost to the consumer than smaller businesses in the

0:12:22.000 --> 0:12:26.000
<v Speaker 1>area which don't have the deep pockets of the bigger corporation.

0:12:26.600 --> 0:12:30.040
<v Speaker 1>The big companies might even sell certain products at cost,

0:12:30.440 --> 0:12:33.360
<v Speaker 1>or even below cost, at a loss in an effort

0:12:33.440 --> 0:12:37.360
<v Speaker 1>to get people into stores. The really big companies can

0:12:37.400 --> 0:12:40.480
<v Speaker 1>afford to do this, and the goal is to get

0:12:40.559 --> 0:12:43.800
<v Speaker 1>more folks into these big stores to not just buy

0:12:43.800 --> 0:12:46.760
<v Speaker 1>the mark down goods, but other stuff as well. And

0:12:46.920 --> 0:12:49.800
<v Speaker 1>a consequence of this is that the big companies are

0:12:49.920 --> 0:12:56.040
<v Speaker 1>luring customers away from smaller independent businesses that can't compete

0:12:56.040 --> 0:12:58.680
<v Speaker 1>on this level. And if the big companies can wait

0:12:58.720 --> 0:13:01.760
<v Speaker 1>it out long enough, those smaller businesses are likely to

0:13:01.840 --> 0:13:05.240
<v Speaker 1>fold entirely. And thus we can see the main street

0:13:05.360 --> 0:13:07.800
<v Speaker 1>of some small towns like the one I grew up

0:13:07.840 --> 0:13:11.720
<v Speaker 1>in North Georgia become ghost towns as the local businesses

0:13:12.000 --> 0:13:16.439
<v Speaker 1>shut down. But if the focus was on anti competitiveness.

0:13:17.160 --> 0:13:21.960
<v Speaker 1>How the heck did we change from that? What happened

0:13:22.280 --> 0:13:25.520
<v Speaker 1>well in the nineteen seventies the courts began to shift

0:13:25.760 --> 0:13:31.120
<v Speaker 1>the interpretation away from this anti competitive nature that can

0:13:31.200 --> 0:13:37.280
<v Speaker 1>hurt smaller businesses and more toward what affects the consumer benefit,

0:13:37.440 --> 0:13:41.360
<v Speaker 1>what what is best for the consumer, rather than what's

0:13:41.520 --> 0:13:45.200
<v Speaker 1>fair for small businesses. The general feeling was that the

0:13:45.280 --> 0:13:50.559
<v Speaker 1>US government shouldn't be so interventionist with business in general,

0:13:51.120 --> 0:13:54.160
<v Speaker 1>and this philosophy had a strong link to the University

0:13:54.200 --> 0:13:58.319
<v Speaker 1>of Chicago, so economics experts call it the Chicago School

0:13:58.480 --> 0:14:02.640
<v Speaker 1>of antitrust policy. Now I'm not saying that this is

0:14:02.760 --> 0:14:06.719
<v Speaker 1>better or worse, but it is different from a consumer perspective,

0:14:07.080 --> 0:14:11.480
<v Speaker 1>though Walmart or Amazon model doesn't, at least initially seem

0:14:11.600 --> 0:14:15.360
<v Speaker 1>bad because as a consumer, you can get the goods

0:14:15.400 --> 0:14:19.680
<v Speaker 1>you want at a lower price than elsewhere, so in

0:14:19.680 --> 0:14:22.560
<v Speaker 1>other words, you save money, which means you can actually

0:14:22.560 --> 0:14:26.520
<v Speaker 1>buy more stuff. So from the consumer standpoint, things seem

0:14:26.640 --> 0:14:30.000
<v Speaker 1>pretty okay. But in the long run this can be

0:14:30.080 --> 0:14:34.080
<v Speaker 1>a very dangerous game to play. If enough smaller businesses

0:14:34.120 --> 0:14:39.280
<v Speaker 1>go put than Amazon or Walmart or whatever becomes the

0:14:39.320 --> 0:14:43.600
<v Speaker 1>only source for goods like our candy store example, and

0:14:43.600 --> 0:14:47.560
<v Speaker 1>then there's nothing really stopping those companies from hiking up prices.

0:14:47.640 --> 0:14:49.800
<v Speaker 1>After all, it's not like you can head over to

0:14:49.840 --> 0:14:52.040
<v Speaker 1>the mom and pop store that went out of business

0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:56.080
<v Speaker 1>ten years ago. That's long gone. With this new focus

0:14:56.160 --> 0:15:01.040
<v Speaker 1>on consumer benefit rather than market competition, we saw companies

0:15:01.040 --> 0:15:04.800
<v Speaker 1>like Walmart really take advantage of the political and legal

0:15:04.840 --> 0:15:09.280
<v Speaker 1>climate of the times. They flourished in the nineteen eighties.

0:15:09.320 --> 0:15:12.800
<v Speaker 1>We also saw a new era of mergers and acquisitions

0:15:12.800 --> 0:15:17.240
<v Speaker 1>and hostile takeovers, and golly, I do not miss those

0:15:17.320 --> 0:15:23.160
<v Speaker 1>days at all, But antitrust laws and sentiment still existed.

0:15:23.280 --> 0:15:26.040
<v Speaker 1>You couldn't go too far with this stuff, or else

0:15:26.200 --> 0:15:28.160
<v Speaker 1>you would get called out for it. After all, the

0:15:28.200 --> 0:15:30.880
<v Speaker 1>breakup of a T and T was a rare example

0:15:30.880 --> 0:15:33.800
<v Speaker 1>of the courts going after a corporation like that. That

0:15:33.880 --> 0:15:37.240
<v Speaker 1>happened in the nineteen eighties kind of at the height

0:15:37.680 --> 0:15:41.760
<v Speaker 1>of this Chicago school of thought. The Chicago School dominated

0:15:41.760 --> 0:15:47.680
<v Speaker 1>antitrust policy thinking until around nineteen when economists began to

0:15:47.720 --> 0:15:54.080
<v Speaker 1>suggest that maybe it wasn't on track. The rather reckless

0:15:54.200 --> 0:15:57.680
<v Speaker 1>mergers and acquisitions of the nineteen eighties, some of which

0:15:57.720 --> 0:16:02.120
<v Speaker 1>had pretty awful consequences further down the road forced people

0:16:02.200 --> 0:16:04.920
<v Speaker 1>to think about things another way and acknowledge that the

0:16:05.000 --> 0:16:09.160
<v Speaker 1>Chicago School of thought didn't take certain variables into account

0:16:09.600 --> 0:16:13.479
<v Speaker 1>and perhaps put too much faith on market based solutions,

0:16:13.760 --> 0:16:17.960
<v Speaker 1>two problems that might require more government intervention. See from

0:16:17.960 --> 0:16:20.880
<v Speaker 1>the Chicago School. The idea is that the market itself

0:16:20.880 --> 0:16:23.320
<v Speaker 1>will sort everything out if you leave it alone enough.

0:16:23.400 --> 0:16:26.280
<v Speaker 1>It's a very kind of loss, a fair approach, but

0:16:26.840 --> 0:16:29.520
<v Speaker 1>these economists were saying, you know, that didn't take into

0:16:29.560 --> 0:16:35.040
<v Speaker 1>accounts stuff that really also are factors here that mean

0:16:35.160 --> 0:16:39.520
<v Speaker 1>that the market can't you know, account for them. And

0:16:39.560 --> 0:16:42.120
<v Speaker 1>there are still proponents of the Chicago school out there,

0:16:42.600 --> 0:16:45.320
<v Speaker 1>and even in this climate, we haven't seen the more

0:16:45.400 --> 0:16:48.720
<v Speaker 1>robust interpretation of antitrust laws that were present decades ago.

0:16:48.840 --> 0:16:52.360
<v Speaker 1>Even as more people are are kind of rejecting or

0:16:52.400 --> 0:16:56.560
<v Speaker 1>at least partially rejecting, the Chicago School, there's the potential

0:16:57.040 --> 0:17:00.320
<v Speaker 1>for a more progressive movement to take the stay age,

0:17:00.760 --> 0:17:02.920
<v Speaker 1>but that's still in the very early days. And as

0:17:02.960 --> 0:17:05.520
<v Speaker 1>I record this, the United States is going through an

0:17:05.520 --> 0:17:09.480
<v Speaker 1>election process that will largely determine how likely that will be.

0:17:10.359 --> 0:17:13.280
<v Speaker 1>And that sets the stage for our next section, where

0:17:13.320 --> 0:17:18.440
<v Speaker 1>I'll talk about a specific case, the United States versus Microsoft,

0:17:18.760 --> 0:17:22.000
<v Speaker 1>but before we get to that, let's take a quick break.

0:17:29.520 --> 0:17:33.280
<v Speaker 1>In the nineteen seventies, Bill Gates and Paul Allen, two

0:17:33.280 --> 0:17:37.440
<v Speaker 1>old friends, started up a company called Microsoft, named after

0:17:37.680 --> 0:17:41.760
<v Speaker 1>micro computers and software, and originally the two would develop

0:17:41.840 --> 0:17:46.160
<v Speaker 1>and sell versions of the programming language Basic for different

0:17:46.200 --> 0:17:48.639
<v Speaker 1>computer platforms, so you can think of it as different

0:17:48.720 --> 0:17:54.359
<v Speaker 1>flavors of Basic. In nineteen eighty, IBM hired Microsoft to

0:17:54.600 --> 0:17:57.679
<v Speaker 1>develop an operating system for what was to become the

0:17:57.760 --> 0:18:02.639
<v Speaker 1>IBM PC, the person Old computer, and Microsoft went and

0:18:02.720 --> 0:18:07.000
<v Speaker 1>acquired software from a different company. They took that software,

0:18:07.240 --> 0:18:10.040
<v Speaker 1>they changed it around a little bit, and they named

0:18:10.040 --> 0:18:13.200
<v Speaker 1>it MS DOSS. Now the story behind that is pretty

0:18:13.240 --> 0:18:16.600
<v Speaker 1>fascinating in its own right, and it gets really cutthroat

0:18:16.840 --> 0:18:19.600
<v Speaker 1>right off the bat, but it's outside the realm of

0:18:19.640 --> 0:18:24.919
<v Speaker 1>this episode. One thing IBM did not demand from Microsoft

0:18:25.040 --> 0:18:28.760
<v Speaker 1>was exclusive rights to the operating system that they developed,

0:18:29.040 --> 0:18:32.119
<v Speaker 1>so Microsoft would actually go on to make versions of

0:18:32.240 --> 0:18:37.119
<v Speaker 1>MS doss for other computer manufacturers. And since IBM was

0:18:37.200 --> 0:18:41.640
<v Speaker 1>relying heavily on off the shelf components for its PCs,

0:18:41.920 --> 0:18:44.879
<v Speaker 1>it meant that any other company could potentially make a

0:18:44.920 --> 0:18:48.080
<v Speaker 1>machine that works in pretty much the same way as

0:18:48.119 --> 0:18:52.320
<v Speaker 1>the official IBM PC, and moreover, they could license an

0:18:52.359 --> 0:18:56.600
<v Speaker 1>operating system from Microsoft that would allow these other machines

0:18:56.640 --> 0:18:59.280
<v Speaker 1>that were built by other companies to run the same

0:18:59.320 --> 0:19:03.080
<v Speaker 1>software that was developed for IBM PCs. This was a

0:19:03.119 --> 0:19:08.320
<v Speaker 1>move that would make the Microsoft founders insanely wealthy, pushing

0:19:08.359 --> 0:19:12.359
<v Speaker 1>the company on the path to operating system domination, and

0:19:12.760 --> 0:19:16.480
<v Speaker 1>ultimately it would also spell doom for IBMS consumer products

0:19:16.480 --> 0:19:21.440
<v Speaker 1>division many years later. Microsoft would then later develop an

0:19:21.440 --> 0:19:24.920
<v Speaker 1>operating system with a graphic user interface or g u

0:19:25.040 --> 0:19:28.879
<v Speaker 1>I or gooey. This was, of course, the Windows operating

0:19:28.920 --> 0:19:32.800
<v Speaker 1>system that you know still dominates today. It took a

0:19:32.800 --> 0:19:36.480
<v Speaker 1>couple of versions for Windows to really catch on, but

0:19:36.600 --> 0:19:39.919
<v Speaker 1>Windows over time would become the main operating system on

0:19:40.000 --> 0:19:44.439
<v Speaker 1>personal computers. There were alternatives. Apple was running a totally

0:19:44.440 --> 0:19:48.240
<v Speaker 1>different operating system for Mac computers, for example, and other

0:19:48.280 --> 0:19:52.879
<v Speaker 1>operating systems would emerge that allowed for alternatives to Windows.

0:19:52.920 --> 0:19:55.639
<v Speaker 1>But it would be disingenuous to say that Windows was

0:19:55.680 --> 0:19:59.439
<v Speaker 1>anything other than the dominant os on the market. It

0:19:59.480 --> 0:20:04.160
<v Speaker 1>absolutely really was, at least for business and personal computers.

0:20:04.160 --> 0:20:06.600
<v Speaker 1>So if you get into things like servers, well, that's

0:20:06.600 --> 0:20:10.119
<v Speaker 1>a different story. But for like personal computers and for

0:20:10.200 --> 0:20:12.679
<v Speaker 1>the stuff you would find in offices, Windows was the

0:20:12.760 --> 0:20:17.280
<v Speaker 1>dominant os. Now that position meant that software developers were

0:20:17.400 --> 0:20:20.399
<v Speaker 1>far more likely to focus on building out software for

0:20:20.560 --> 0:20:25.000
<v Speaker 1>Windows based machines. After all, if the vast majority of

0:20:25.040 --> 0:20:29.240
<v Speaker 1>computer users are relying on Windows as their operating system,

0:20:29.320 --> 0:20:32.840
<v Speaker 1>it makes sense to focus development efforts where the market is.

0:20:32.960 --> 0:20:36.480
<v Speaker 1>You go to where your customers are. You could create

0:20:36.520 --> 0:20:39.680
<v Speaker 1>software for other operating systems, but you would do that

0:20:39.920 --> 0:20:43.280
<v Speaker 1>knowing that there are fewer users that are relying on

0:20:43.440 --> 0:20:47.159
<v Speaker 1>alternatives to Windows, which means your potential consumer base is

0:20:47.200 --> 0:20:50.440
<v Speaker 1>already much smaller than it would be if you had

0:20:50.520 --> 0:20:53.800
<v Speaker 1>developed for Windows. You could argue, and I think you

0:20:53.840 --> 0:20:57.960
<v Speaker 1>could do so pretty persuasively, that the space was largely

0:20:58.040 --> 0:21:02.159
<v Speaker 1>anti competitive even early on, though some platforms like the

0:21:02.200 --> 0:21:05.440
<v Speaker 1>Mac had a decent amount of developer support behind them.

0:21:05.520 --> 0:21:08.399
<v Speaker 1>But keep in mind we're talking about the nineteen eighties

0:21:08.440 --> 0:21:12.160
<v Speaker 1>and early nineties here. This is before Apple had its renaissance.

0:21:12.840 --> 0:21:16.960
<v Speaker 1>In nineteen nine, a lawyer for the FTC named Norris

0:21:17.000 --> 0:21:21.880
<v Speaker 1>Washington had attended a computer trade show called Comdex, where

0:21:21.920 --> 0:21:27.360
<v Speaker 1>IBM and Microsoft announced a collaboration that raised his eyebrows.

0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:30.720
<v Speaker 1>The announcement sounded like it was treading a little too

0:21:30.720 --> 0:21:33.840
<v Speaker 1>close to collusion in an effort to control the PC

0:21:34.000 --> 0:21:38.240
<v Speaker 1>and operating system market. It wasn't until nineteen ninety that

0:21:38.359 --> 0:21:41.679
<v Speaker 1>the FTC would begin its official probe into the matter,

0:21:41.800 --> 0:21:45.600
<v Speaker 1>because the U S Department of Justice was initially reluctant

0:21:45.600 --> 0:21:50.320
<v Speaker 1>to authorize an investigation. At this stage, the matter revolved

0:21:50.359 --> 0:21:55.040
<v Speaker 1>around OS two, which belongs in the Doss family of

0:21:55.119 --> 0:22:00.320
<v Speaker 1>operating systems. However, in the gap between the announced meant

0:22:01.040 --> 0:22:04.479
<v Speaker 1>that IBM and Microsoft were going to work together and

0:22:04.560 --> 0:22:07.960
<v Speaker 1>the actual investigation, there had been something of a falling

0:22:08.000 --> 0:22:11.720
<v Speaker 1>out between Microsoft and IBM, and Microsoft was looking to

0:22:11.760 --> 0:22:15.840
<v Speaker 1>push its Windows operating system over OS two, which means

0:22:15.840 --> 0:22:19.360
<v Speaker 1>that it was no longer really interested in this approach

0:22:19.400 --> 0:22:22.639
<v Speaker 1>with IBM. But by that time other third parties were

0:22:22.680 --> 0:22:26.480
<v Speaker 1>coming forward to complain about Microsoft to the government. They

0:22:26.480 --> 0:22:30.200
<v Speaker 1>were saying that Microsoft was making changes to its operating

0:22:30.200 --> 0:22:35.159
<v Speaker 1>system that would make third party software incompatible with computers

0:22:35.160 --> 0:22:39.240
<v Speaker 1>that were running that operating system, among other charges. The

0:22:39.359 --> 0:22:43.159
<v Speaker 1>FTC was in a political deadlock over the matter, and

0:22:43.200 --> 0:22:45.360
<v Speaker 1>there was a great deal of pressure from the Department

0:22:45.359 --> 0:22:49.879
<v Speaker 1>of Justice to go very narrow and focused and small

0:22:50.119 --> 0:22:53.120
<v Speaker 1>with the probe. The thought being that the US software

0:22:53.160 --> 0:22:55.960
<v Speaker 1>industry was a really important one to the United States,

0:22:55.960 --> 0:22:59.199
<v Speaker 1>and so you know, maybe we could, you know, just

0:22:59.440 --> 0:23:04.560
<v Speaker 1>not break up Microsoft for some little anti competitive monopolistic behaviors.

0:23:04.600 --> 0:23:08.560
<v Speaker 1>You know, what's a little what's a little illegal behavior

0:23:08.600 --> 0:23:12.520
<v Speaker 1>among friends, I guess. In the end, the FTC and

0:23:12.600 --> 0:23:15.679
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft would come to an agreement in which the company

0:23:15.720 --> 0:23:20.919
<v Speaker 1>would sign a consent decree that was intended to limit

0:23:21.040 --> 0:23:25.240
<v Speaker 1>how Microsoft might lockout competition from the PC market. But

0:23:25.400 --> 0:23:28.080
<v Speaker 1>later on Bill Gates himself would claim that the consent

0:23:28.200 --> 0:23:32.159
<v Speaker 1>decree amounted to nothing at all, so it might as

0:23:32.200 --> 0:23:36.280
<v Speaker 1>well have been political theater. One important part of this

0:23:36.400 --> 0:23:40.480
<v Speaker 1>decree was that Microsoft agreed that it would not integrate

0:23:40.640 --> 0:23:45.040
<v Speaker 1>other Microsoft products into Windows as a tie in. So,

0:23:45.080 --> 0:23:49.240
<v Speaker 1>in other words, Microsoft shouldn't tie you know, like productivity

0:23:49.280 --> 0:23:53.000
<v Speaker 1>software like the Office Suite directly to Windows, because that

0:23:53.040 --> 0:23:56.600
<v Speaker 1>would be unfair to companies that are developing third party

0:23:56.680 --> 0:24:00.679
<v Speaker 1>productivity software as competition. The company would be allowed to

0:24:00.680 --> 0:24:04.840
<v Speaker 1>create new features in Windows, that's okay, to make Windows

0:24:05.040 --> 0:24:09.440
<v Speaker 1>more feature rich, but things that were products that were

0:24:09.440 --> 0:24:12.680
<v Speaker 1>meant to be, you know, a separate thing in addition

0:24:12.760 --> 0:24:16.439
<v Speaker 1>to Windows that was supposed to be separate. By the

0:24:16.480 --> 0:24:19.880
<v Speaker 1>time we get to the early and mid nineteen nineties,

0:24:19.920 --> 0:24:23.960
<v Speaker 1>a new complication emerged the Worldwide Web and the Internet

0:24:24.000 --> 0:24:27.240
<v Speaker 1>in general. But the web is really where our story coalesces,

0:24:28.040 --> 0:24:30.960
<v Speaker 1>is the point I'm making here. Now we all know

0:24:31.600 --> 0:24:34.680
<v Speaker 1>that to access the web you need an Internet browser.

0:24:35.000 --> 0:24:38.000
<v Speaker 1>You know, a program that interprets your commands, It fetches

0:24:38.080 --> 0:24:41.760
<v Speaker 1>pages from servers, it displays those pages in a way

0:24:41.800 --> 0:24:45.680
<v Speaker 1>that you can navigate and understand. And here's where things

0:24:45.800 --> 0:24:50.679
<v Speaker 1>really escalated. So an early popular web browser, the dominant

0:24:50.720 --> 0:24:56.320
<v Speaker 1>one was Netscape Navigator. It debuted in and quickly became

0:24:56.400 --> 0:24:59.960
<v Speaker 1>the most popular web browsing platform. It held about seventy

0:25:00.119 --> 0:25:02.920
<v Speaker 1>five percent of the market before the end of the year.

0:25:03.480 --> 0:25:06.080
<v Speaker 1>Now keep in mind this is in the very early

0:25:06.200 --> 0:25:09.399
<v Speaker 1>days of the web, when awareness of the web even

0:25:09.480 --> 0:25:13.200
<v Speaker 1>being a thing was largely contained to stuff like college

0:25:13.240 --> 0:25:17.199
<v Speaker 1>campuses and research centers. One thing that Netscape aimed to

0:25:17.280 --> 0:25:20.880
<v Speaker 1>do with the Navigator browser was to create a standardized

0:25:20.960 --> 0:25:26.239
<v Speaker 1>browsing experience across all operating system platforms, meaning that at

0:25:26.320 --> 0:25:29.760
<v Speaker 1>least in theory, no matter what type of computer or

0:25:29.800 --> 0:25:33.200
<v Speaker 1>what type of operating system you were, depending upon your

0:25:33.240 --> 0:25:37.240
<v Speaker 1>experience on Netscape should be the same from computer to computer,

0:25:37.680 --> 0:25:41.080
<v Speaker 1>and anyone who has used the quote unquote same software

0:25:41.200 --> 0:25:45.119
<v Speaker 1>on different operating systems knows how unusual that can be.

0:25:45.320 --> 0:25:48.639
<v Speaker 1>You know, just finding options can be a totally different

0:25:48.680 --> 0:25:52.800
<v Speaker 1>experience from one to the other. Perhaps Microsoft was worried

0:25:53.200 --> 0:25:58.040
<v Speaker 1>that more software developers would follow netscapes lead. And if

0:25:58.080 --> 0:26:02.800
<v Speaker 1>the same program works same way across every operating system

0:26:02.840 --> 0:26:06.400
<v Speaker 1>on every computer, it levels the playing field and other

0:26:06.480 --> 0:26:10.399
<v Speaker 1>operating system developers could potentially gain some ground on the

0:26:10.440 --> 0:26:15.480
<v Speaker 1>monolithic Microsoft. If Microsoft Windows is not providing a superior

0:26:15.560 --> 0:26:19.880
<v Speaker 1>experience because the software just works better on it, well

0:26:19.880 --> 0:26:22.440
<v Speaker 1>that could be a problem. So the company had its

0:26:22.480 --> 0:26:30.280
<v Speaker 1>own strategy. In Microsoft unveiled Internet Explorer, a competing Internet browser.

0:26:30.760 --> 0:26:34.119
<v Speaker 1>The original Internet Explorer was built on code developed by

0:26:34.160 --> 0:26:39.080
<v Speaker 1>an Internet software company called Spyglass, which in turn based

0:26:39.200 --> 0:26:44.000
<v Speaker 1>their code off of NCSA's Mosaic Browser. In fact, there

0:26:44.040 --> 0:26:47.600
<v Speaker 1>were two flavors of this originally, one that was essentially

0:26:47.720 --> 0:26:53.000
<v Speaker 1>Mosaic code and another that was just heavily influenced by

0:26:53.119 --> 0:26:57.119
<v Speaker 1>Mosaic Code. And the deal with Spyglass was that Microsoft

0:26:57.200 --> 0:27:01.320
<v Speaker 1>would pay a recurring licensing fee too Eyeglass for use

0:27:01.520 --> 0:27:06.359
<v Speaker 1>of the software, plus a share of any revenues that

0:27:06.600 --> 0:27:11.399
<v Speaker 1>sales would generate from this browser. But then Microsoft did

0:27:11.520 --> 0:27:14.480
<v Speaker 1>something sneaky, deaky and seriously, if you look at the

0:27:14.560 --> 0:27:17.960
<v Speaker 1>history of Microsoft's deals with other software companies, this next

0:27:18.040 --> 0:27:20.080
<v Speaker 1>bit is not going to come as a surprise to

0:27:20.119 --> 0:27:24.480
<v Speaker 1>you at all. Microsoft would end up bundling Internet Explorer

0:27:24.880 --> 0:27:29.560
<v Speaker 1>with Windows for free. At least arguably it was for

0:27:29.760 --> 0:27:34.600
<v Speaker 1>free because the company wasn't making revenue directly off Internet Explorer,

0:27:34.680 --> 0:27:38.360
<v Speaker 1>it wasn't selling Internet Explorer to users. That would mean

0:27:38.680 --> 0:27:42.639
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft would only owe Spyglass that licensing fee because there

0:27:42.680 --> 0:27:44.840
<v Speaker 1>were no revenues to share at all. They didn't have

0:27:45.040 --> 0:27:49.400
<v Speaker 1>to give any profits from Windows because that was an

0:27:49.440 --> 0:27:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Internet Explorer. Yeah, that's kind of unethical, I would argue,

0:27:55.960 --> 0:27:58.440
<v Speaker 1>or at least it was kind of low handed. The

0:27:58.560 --> 0:28:01.400
<v Speaker 1>idea of I'll give you a share of everything I sell,

0:28:01.720 --> 0:28:03.720
<v Speaker 1>and then you don't sell it. You just package it

0:28:03.800 --> 0:28:06.359
<v Speaker 1>with something else that you happen to be selling, and

0:28:06.440 --> 0:28:09.000
<v Speaker 1>then you make the argument, oh no, that didn't generate revenue,

0:28:09.200 --> 0:28:13.800
<v Speaker 1>that was just part of something bigger that did generate revenue. Meanwhile,

0:28:14.160 --> 0:28:17.879
<v Speaker 1>by making Internet Explore a part of the Windows bundle,

0:28:18.359 --> 0:28:20.680
<v Speaker 1>the company was getting a browser in front of users

0:28:20.800 --> 0:28:23.760
<v Speaker 1>before they could even consider if they wanted something else,

0:28:24.280 --> 0:28:26.880
<v Speaker 1>and that Escape saw this as a threat. Pretty much

0:28:27.000 --> 0:28:30.320
<v Speaker 1>right away. The company was selling its browser, and now

0:28:30.480 --> 0:28:34.359
<v Speaker 1>here comes the company behind the dominant operating system on

0:28:34.480 --> 0:28:37.720
<v Speaker 1>the market, offering up its own browser for free and

0:28:37.960 --> 0:28:41.800
<v Speaker 1>bundled with the operating system. Beyond that, the company strong

0:28:41.960 --> 0:28:47.000
<v Speaker 1>armed PC manufacturing companies into an agreement. The manufacturers who

0:28:47.120 --> 0:28:50.600
<v Speaker 1>wanted to load Windows onto the machines they were producing

0:28:50.680 --> 0:28:53.800
<v Speaker 1>and then selling to consumers would have to agree to

0:28:53.920 --> 0:28:58.640
<v Speaker 1>have Internet Explorer bundled on those machines. So let's say

0:28:59.000 --> 0:29:02.720
<v Speaker 1>you're in charge of a company that makes computers. We're

0:29:02.720 --> 0:29:06.920
<v Speaker 1>gonna call it Dull Dull computers. So you run Dull

0:29:07.000 --> 0:29:10.120
<v Speaker 1>computers and you build out a range of PCs both

0:29:10.200 --> 0:29:13.200
<v Speaker 1>for enterprise customers and end users like you and me,

0:29:14.080 --> 0:29:17.600
<v Speaker 1>and you want to license Windows to load onto the

0:29:17.720 --> 0:29:21.360
<v Speaker 1>machines you're building, because that's a selling factor. Right It's

0:29:21.400 --> 0:29:24.720
<v Speaker 1>the dominant operating system on the market, and most end

0:29:24.840 --> 0:29:28.960
<v Speaker 1>users wouldn't be familiar with other operating systems, and even

0:29:29.120 --> 0:29:31.880
<v Speaker 1>fewer of those people would understand how to install their

0:29:31.960 --> 0:29:35.800
<v Speaker 1>own operating system onto a machine. But if you do

0:29:36.160 --> 0:29:40.080
<v Speaker 1>enter into that licensing agreement with Microsoft, you also have

0:29:40.240 --> 0:29:43.760
<v Speaker 1>to pre install Internet Explorer on those machines. It's part

0:29:43.840 --> 0:29:46.720
<v Speaker 1>of the deal. The U. S Department of Justice took

0:29:46.840 --> 0:29:51.080
<v Speaker 1>issue with this, and the antitrust attention against Microsoft hit

0:29:51.240 --> 0:29:55.200
<v Speaker 1>a new peak. Bill Gates would argue in the trial

0:29:55.360 --> 0:29:59.560
<v Speaker 1>in video depositions that Internet Explorer was not its own product,

0:29:59.640 --> 0:30:03.800
<v Speaker 1>it was just a feature of Windows, which again, according

0:30:03.840 --> 0:30:07.240
<v Speaker 1>to the consent decree was tots oki doki. That was

0:30:07.320 --> 0:30:09.640
<v Speaker 1>fine as long as it was a feature of Windows,

0:30:10.320 --> 0:30:14.200
<v Speaker 1>then that that was allowable. What was not allowed is

0:30:14.280 --> 0:30:17.960
<v Speaker 1>to bundle a product with Windows. But the Department of

0:30:18.080 --> 0:30:21.280
<v Speaker 1>Justice said, no, wait a minute. You also offer Internet

0:30:21.360 --> 0:30:25.320
<v Speaker 1>Explorer for Mac computers, for the Mac operating system, and

0:30:25.440 --> 0:30:28.720
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft does not have anything to do with the Mac

0:30:28.800 --> 0:30:32.480
<v Speaker 1>operating system. That means the Internet Explorer has to be

0:30:32.560 --> 0:30:34.920
<v Speaker 1>a product. It's not a feature because you sell it

0:30:35.720 --> 0:30:40.520
<v Speaker 1>for the Mac, and that means that it should be

0:30:40.720 --> 0:30:43.440
<v Speaker 1>separate from Windows. It should not be bundled with it.

0:30:43.760 --> 0:30:47.680
<v Speaker 1>The antitrust trial stretched on for many, many months, with

0:30:47.800 --> 0:30:51.400
<v Speaker 1>more than seventy days of testimony, the judge presiding over

0:30:51.440 --> 0:30:55.560
<v Speaker 1>the case found Microsoft guilty of anti competitive behaviors and

0:30:55.680 --> 0:30:59.479
<v Speaker 1>attempting to gain a monopolistic hold on the OS market

0:30:59.560 --> 0:31:03.480
<v Speaker 1>and the browser market, and initially the judge ordered Microsoft

0:31:03.600 --> 0:31:07.840
<v Speaker 1>to split into two companies nicknamed baby Bills after Bill

0:31:07.960 --> 0:31:10.720
<v Speaker 1>Gates and a little throwback to the baby bells of

0:31:10.800 --> 0:31:15.000
<v Speaker 1>a T and T that decision. The judge's decision got

0:31:15.160 --> 0:31:20.240
<v Speaker 1>overturned by an appeals court, and ultimately Microsoft would settle

0:31:20.480 --> 0:31:23.560
<v Speaker 1>with the Department of Justice out of court, and the

0:31:23.640 --> 0:31:27.240
<v Speaker 1>whole story is a total chaotic mess. The Department of

0:31:27.360 --> 0:31:31.240
<v Speaker 1>Justice's case against Microsoft had a lot of problems, some

0:31:31.400 --> 0:31:33.280
<v Speaker 1>of which seemed to indicate that the government had a

0:31:33.360 --> 0:31:36.760
<v Speaker 1>distinct lack of understanding when it comes to software. But

0:31:36.920 --> 0:31:42.000
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft also had some really awful mistakes and just bad

0:31:42.080 --> 0:31:45.120
<v Speaker 1>decisions during that trial as well, including a moment where

0:31:45.160 --> 0:31:48.360
<v Speaker 1>they presented a videotape as evidence to show how easy

0:31:48.400 --> 0:31:52.000
<v Speaker 1>it was to uninstall Internet Explorer, and later it was

0:31:52.080 --> 0:31:56.480
<v Speaker 1>discovered and proven that that videotape had been edited. Not great,

0:31:56.760 --> 0:32:00.360
<v Speaker 1>nobody came out of this looking particularly rosie, but in

0:32:00.440 --> 0:32:03.920
<v Speaker 1>the end, Microsoft was not forced to break up into

0:32:04.040 --> 0:32:07.920
<v Speaker 1>different companies. The trial did force Microsoft to back off

0:32:08.000 --> 0:32:11.840
<v Speaker 1>a little bit from its practices Netscape Navigator, which was

0:32:11.960 --> 0:32:16.000
<v Speaker 1>not a plaintiff in this case. Although executives from Netscape

0:32:16.080 --> 0:32:19.400
<v Speaker 1>would be subpoena to speak during the trial, they would

0:32:19.480 --> 0:32:23.280
<v Speaker 1>see their market share continued to decline until the company

0:32:23.400 --> 0:32:26.040
<v Speaker 1>just pulled the plug on the browser in two thousand eight.

0:32:26.720 --> 0:32:30.200
<v Speaker 1>As for Internet Explorer, it would be the dominant browser

0:32:30.320 --> 0:32:35.600
<v Speaker 1>until late when Mozilla Firefox overtook Internet Explorer as the

0:32:35.720 --> 0:32:39.440
<v Speaker 1>dominant browser on the market. Two interesting things about this

0:32:39.960 --> 0:32:43.720
<v Speaker 1>One is that Microsoft had gone back to bundling Internet

0:32:43.760 --> 0:32:47.680
<v Speaker 1>Explorer with Windows at that point, but also the company

0:32:47.760 --> 0:32:51.560
<v Speaker 1>had ended support for Internet Explorer on platforms like the

0:32:51.640 --> 0:32:54.800
<v Speaker 1>Mac operating system, so they were once again arguing that

0:32:55.360 --> 0:32:59.040
<v Speaker 1>Internet Explorer was really a feature of Windows and was

0:32:59.160 --> 0:33:02.960
<v Speaker 1>tightly integrate it into Windows and wasn't its own separate program.

0:33:03.840 --> 0:33:08.200
<v Speaker 1>And the second interesting thing is that Mozilla Firefox was

0:33:08.320 --> 0:33:12.960
<v Speaker 1>a spiritual successor to Netscape Navigator. Netscape had created the

0:33:13.040 --> 0:33:17.760
<v Speaker 1>Mozilla Foundation just before Netscape itself got acquired by a

0:33:17.960 --> 0:33:22.120
<v Speaker 1>O L. And in case you're wondering, according to stat Counter,

0:33:22.600 --> 0:33:27.840
<v Speaker 1>Internet Explorer now makes up about one point five percent

0:33:28.080 --> 0:33:32.280
<v Speaker 1>of the global browser market share, not a huge surprise. Obviously,

0:33:32.400 --> 0:33:37.920
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft no longer supports Internet Explorer. The newer Microsoft Browser

0:33:38.320 --> 0:33:42.000
<v Speaker 1>Edge has just two point eight five percent market share.

0:33:42.440 --> 0:33:45.160
<v Speaker 1>At the other end of the spectrum is Google Chrome,

0:33:45.440 --> 0:33:48.640
<v Speaker 1>which accounts for more than sixty six percent of the

0:33:48.720 --> 0:33:53.120
<v Speaker 1>market share. Now, granted, this is across all platforms, and

0:33:53.240 --> 0:33:56.400
<v Speaker 1>back in the two thousand's we were only talking about computers,

0:33:56.840 --> 0:34:00.240
<v Speaker 1>mainly desktops and a few laptops. But to a you

0:34:00.320 --> 0:34:03.280
<v Speaker 1>also have to include smartphones and tablets in there, and

0:34:03.360 --> 0:34:06.080
<v Speaker 1>that's really where Google is running away with things in

0:34:06.160 --> 0:34:09.520
<v Speaker 1>the smartphone category. And that brings us up to our

0:34:09.600 --> 0:34:11.680
<v Speaker 1>next section, where we'll take a look at some of

0:34:11.719 --> 0:34:15.759
<v Speaker 1>the current issues around antitrust concerns with big tech. But

0:34:15.880 --> 0:34:26.600
<v Speaker 1>first let's take another quick break. Okay, Now we're up

0:34:26.640 --> 0:34:30.400
<v Speaker 1>to the most recent antitrust report in the United States,

0:34:30.680 --> 0:34:35.680
<v Speaker 1>which focuses on Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google. Now, as

0:34:35.719 --> 0:34:39.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure has become obvious during the course of this episode,

0:34:39.760 --> 0:34:43.880
<v Speaker 1>it is impossible to separate these issues from politics in general.

0:34:44.239 --> 0:34:47.320
<v Speaker 1>The report is the product of the Democratic members of

0:34:47.360 --> 0:34:52.239
<v Speaker 1>the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust. The investigation leading up

0:34:52.400 --> 0:34:56.000
<v Speaker 1>to The report lasted more than a year. During the investigation,

0:34:56.080 --> 0:34:59.560
<v Speaker 1>there were seven Congressional hearings, and the full report is

0:34:59.600 --> 0:35:04.840
<v Speaker 1>about four hundred fifty pages long. Yikes. Now, I'm going

0:35:04.880 --> 0:35:07.719
<v Speaker 1>to be straight with you, guys, I did not read

0:35:07.880 --> 0:35:13.600
<v Speaker 1>the whole report, which is incidentally available online in its entirety.

0:35:13.880 --> 0:35:17.760
<v Speaker 1>If you want to read it, go to Judiciary dot House,

0:35:18.120 --> 0:35:27.640
<v Speaker 1>dot gov, slash uploaded files, slash Competition, Underscore in Underscore Digital,

0:35:28.040 --> 0:35:32.800
<v Speaker 1>Underscore Markets dot pdf, just in case you find yourself

0:35:32.880 --> 0:35:35.640
<v Speaker 1>with some time on your hands and an itch to

0:35:35.760 --> 0:35:38.960
<v Speaker 1>learn more about this sort of thing. Thankfully, the report

0:35:39.120 --> 0:35:44.360
<v Speaker 1>opens with the chairs forward, followed by executive Summary and findings,

0:35:44.920 --> 0:35:46.920
<v Speaker 1>and that gives us a lot to talk about just

0:35:47.200 --> 0:35:50.160
<v Speaker 1>right there without having to read the full report. The

0:35:50.239 --> 0:35:52.800
<v Speaker 1>full report does have more information on how the committee

0:35:52.880 --> 0:35:57.000
<v Speaker 1>came to its conclusions, and so the whole report is important.

0:35:57.200 --> 0:36:02.960
<v Speaker 1>It's just exhaustive and exhaust staying as well, the report opens,

0:36:03.040 --> 0:36:06.080
<v Speaker 1>as I said, with the chairs forward, and that includes

0:36:06.160 --> 0:36:10.239
<v Speaker 1>some you know, semi harsh words for the CEOs of

0:36:10.320 --> 0:36:13.680
<v Speaker 1>the four companies that are involved, stating that the answers

0:36:13.800 --> 0:36:17.160
<v Speaker 1>that the leaders gave to Congress were frequently evasive, or

0:36:17.400 --> 0:36:21.280
<v Speaker 1>non responsive. The chair also states that the four companies

0:36:21.320 --> 0:36:25.920
<v Speaker 1>have become quote a gatekeeper over a key channel of distribution.

0:36:26.120 --> 0:36:29.840
<v Speaker 1>By controlling access to markets, these giants can pick winners

0:36:29.960 --> 0:36:34.200
<v Speaker 1>and losers throughout our economy end quote. So, like the

0:36:34.280 --> 0:36:37.760
<v Speaker 1>antitrust cases of old, the chair asserts that these companies

0:36:37.840 --> 0:36:40.840
<v Speaker 1>have made it a practice to consolidate power, both in

0:36:40.960 --> 0:36:44.920
<v Speaker 1>the market and beyond. The chair goes on to state, quote,

0:36:45.440 --> 0:36:49.120
<v Speaker 1>they not only wield tremendous power, but they also abuse

0:36:49.200 --> 0:36:54.040
<v Speaker 1>it by charging exorbitant fees, imposing oppressive contract terms, and

0:36:54.160 --> 0:36:58.200
<v Speaker 1>extracting valuable data from the people and businesses that rely

0:36:58.320 --> 0:37:01.480
<v Speaker 1>on them. End quote. It goes on to state that

0:37:01.600 --> 0:37:05.120
<v Speaker 1>the companies use their vast influence to maintain a market

0:37:05.200 --> 0:37:10.719
<v Speaker 1>advantage over other companies, suppressing competition, either through buying out

0:37:10.840 --> 0:37:15.000
<v Speaker 1>competitors or copying what those competitors are doing in an

0:37:15.040 --> 0:37:18.600
<v Speaker 1>effort to undermine them. Facebook leaps to mind when I

0:37:18.719 --> 0:37:21.400
<v Speaker 1>hear this, because the company had done things like they

0:37:21.440 --> 0:37:25.680
<v Speaker 1>acquired Instagram because Instagram was doing better in the photo

0:37:25.840 --> 0:37:29.920
<v Speaker 1>sharing space than Facebook was, And they've also spent a

0:37:30.000 --> 0:37:34.160
<v Speaker 1>lot of time recently copying other platforms like Snapchat and TikTok,

0:37:34.640 --> 0:37:40.000
<v Speaker 1>largely through their Instagram division. Moving on to the findings

0:37:40.040 --> 0:37:42.760
<v Speaker 1>of the report itself, it states that the combined value

0:37:42.840 --> 0:37:47.120
<v Speaker 1>of the four companies is more than five trillion dollars,

0:37:47.200 --> 0:37:50.960
<v Speaker 1>which goes beyond a princely some it moves into like

0:37:51.920 --> 0:37:57.440
<v Speaker 1>Grand puba territory. The conclusions found that these companies represented

0:37:57.480 --> 0:38:03.240
<v Speaker 1>a monopoly in several markets, including social networking, online advertising,

0:38:03.400 --> 0:38:07.880
<v Speaker 1>and online search. The finding state that, quote, in interviews

0:38:07.960 --> 0:38:13.440
<v Speaker 1>with subcommittee staff, numerous businesses described how dominant platforms exploit

0:38:13.520 --> 0:38:17.719
<v Speaker 1>their gatekeeping power to dictate terms and extract concessions that

0:38:17.920 --> 0:38:21.200
<v Speaker 1>no one would reasonably consent to in a competitive market.

0:38:21.680 --> 0:38:24.640
<v Speaker 1>End quote. It goes on to say, the various market

0:38:24.719 --> 0:38:28.719
<v Speaker 1>players state they are dependent on these larger companies, and

0:38:28.840 --> 0:38:32.440
<v Speaker 1>as a consequence, they have no recourse but to agree

0:38:32.480 --> 0:38:35.479
<v Speaker 1>to those concessions. So, in other words, if you don't

0:38:35.520 --> 0:38:38.879
<v Speaker 1>play by these companies rules, you don't get to play

0:38:38.960 --> 0:38:42.440
<v Speaker 1>at all. The subcommittee also lays some blame at the

0:38:42.520 --> 0:38:45.960
<v Speaker 1>feet of the Federal Trade Commission, stating that the FTC

0:38:46.239 --> 0:38:50.240
<v Speaker 1>declined to investigate most of the acquisitions that these companies

0:38:50.320 --> 0:38:53.960
<v Speaker 1>had pursued over the years, pointing out that Facebook acquired

0:38:54.360 --> 0:38:57.719
<v Speaker 1>dozens of companies, nearly one hundred of them, but the

0:38:57.840 --> 0:39:01.480
<v Speaker 1>FTC only chose to invest eight one of those, and

0:39:01.640 --> 0:39:06.760
<v Speaker 1>that was Instagram. In the subcommittee concludes that the FTC

0:39:07.200 --> 0:39:10.719
<v Speaker 1>essentially turned a blind eye towards mergers and acquisitions that

0:39:10.840 --> 0:39:15.320
<v Speaker 1>have since, at least by the Subcommittee's estimation, proven to

0:39:15.480 --> 0:39:20.080
<v Speaker 1>have reduced competition in the market. This, the Subcommittee says,

0:39:20.400 --> 0:39:25.359
<v Speaker 1>has reduced consumer choice, it's hurt innovation and entrepreneurship, as

0:39:25.440 --> 0:39:28.279
<v Speaker 1>good ideas can be smothered if they're not coming from

0:39:28.360 --> 0:39:32.040
<v Speaker 1>within one of these four companies, and has caused greater

0:39:32.160 --> 0:39:36.760
<v Speaker 1>harm by extension by reducing americans privacy and also hurting

0:39:36.840 --> 0:39:41.240
<v Speaker 1>the free press. Uh. Those shots seemed fired primarily at Facebook,

0:39:41.280 --> 0:39:44.120
<v Speaker 1>though I'm sure Google takes some heat for that as well.

0:39:44.800 --> 0:39:49.480
<v Speaker 1>The report lays out a fairly extensive argument against each company,

0:39:49.920 --> 0:39:53.880
<v Speaker 1>providing evidence supporting the allegations. It also goes on to

0:39:54.000 --> 0:39:58.759
<v Speaker 1>explain the consequences of the anti competitive and monopolistic strategies

0:39:59.200 --> 0:40:02.200
<v Speaker 1>that are playing out in the real world, from shutting

0:40:02.239 --> 0:40:07.239
<v Speaker 1>down potential competitors to impacting the democratic process itself. But

0:40:07.360 --> 0:40:10.360
<v Speaker 1>I feel like most of us have at least a

0:40:10.560 --> 0:40:14.080
<v Speaker 1>grasp on this stuff already. I think it's pretty obvious

0:40:14.360 --> 0:40:18.759
<v Speaker 1>that Facebook dominates social networking, and even more obvious that

0:40:18.840 --> 0:40:22.720
<v Speaker 1>Google has the lockdown on search. And we know about

0:40:22.840 --> 0:40:25.879
<v Speaker 1>the ways that companies like Facebook and Google make money

0:40:26.160 --> 0:40:29.440
<v Speaker 1>through ads, which is then boosted because the companies have

0:40:29.640 --> 0:40:33.319
<v Speaker 1>vast amount of information about us, you know, the consumers

0:40:33.360 --> 0:40:36.440
<v Speaker 1>who are using these products. Turns out we are the product,

0:40:36.520 --> 0:40:39.040
<v Speaker 1>We're the ones being bought and sold, and we know

0:40:39.160 --> 0:40:41.600
<v Speaker 1>about Amazon and Apple on top of that. So the

0:40:41.680 --> 0:40:45.120
<v Speaker 1>question remains, what, if anything, is there to be done

0:40:45.160 --> 0:40:49.200
<v Speaker 1>about it here in the United States. The subcommittee concluded

0:40:49.280 --> 0:40:53.560
<v Speaker 1>that a multi pronged approach is needed to address the

0:40:53.640 --> 0:40:57.600
<v Speaker 1>problems that were uncovered in the investigation. One of those

0:40:57.840 --> 0:41:00.320
<v Speaker 1>starts with the role of Congress when it comes to

0:41:00.400 --> 0:41:05.959
<v Speaker 1>providing oversight into antitrust matters. The subcommittee concluded that there

0:41:06.280 --> 0:41:10.120
<v Speaker 1>is a need to examine antitrust laws to make sure

0:41:10.160 --> 0:41:13.719
<v Speaker 1>they're working properly and that they're being enforced, and in

0:41:13.840 --> 0:41:18.120
<v Speaker 1>cases where the law isn't doing enough, that Congress drafts

0:41:18.320 --> 0:41:22.320
<v Speaker 1>new amendments or even new laws to fix this. To

0:41:22.480 --> 0:41:28.040
<v Speaker 1>that end, the subcommittee identified various reforms for consideration, including

0:41:28.120 --> 0:41:32.799
<v Speaker 1>several intended to restore competition in the digital economy. Among those,

0:41:32.920 --> 0:41:37.280
<v Speaker 1>the Subcommittee suggests reforms that would prevent companies from operating

0:41:37.360 --> 0:41:40.759
<v Speaker 1>within adjacent lines of business. So, in other words, if

0:41:40.800 --> 0:41:43.960
<v Speaker 1>a company is focused on a specific business within the

0:41:44.080 --> 0:41:47.080
<v Speaker 1>digital economy, then the company would not be allowed to

0:41:47.160 --> 0:41:52.080
<v Speaker 1>make moves to expand into related but distinct minds of business.

0:41:52.840 --> 0:41:56.920
<v Speaker 1>Another reform suggestion is that Congress should create restrictions to

0:41:57.000 --> 0:42:01.040
<v Speaker 1>eliminate the ability of a digital platform to us self

0:42:01.120 --> 0:42:05.279
<v Speaker 1>preferential approaches. So, in other words, a company shouldn't be

0:42:05.320 --> 0:42:09.560
<v Speaker 1>allowed to design a platform that then gives advantages to

0:42:10.280 --> 0:42:16.279
<v Speaker 1>that company's designed programs and disadvantages to programs that are

0:42:16.320 --> 0:42:20.319
<v Speaker 1>made by third parties. So the Microsoft Windows example from

0:42:20.360 --> 0:42:22.920
<v Speaker 1>earlier in this episode falls into this kind of category.

0:42:23.040 --> 0:42:27.279
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft was giving preferential treatment to Internet Explorer at the

0:42:27.360 --> 0:42:31.360
<v Speaker 1>expense of competitors like Netscape. You could argue that you

0:42:31.480 --> 0:42:34.080
<v Speaker 1>could look at Apple and say, all right, as Apple

0:42:34.200 --> 0:42:39.920
<v Speaker 1>giving preferential treatment to Apple developed apps and giving and

0:42:40.160 --> 0:42:45.240
<v Speaker 1>gate keeping other companies that are attempting to make competitive apps.

0:42:45.600 --> 0:42:48.440
<v Speaker 1>And you can make a decent argument about that, especially

0:42:48.520 --> 0:42:51.759
<v Speaker 1>since Apple is so very careful about which apps are

0:42:51.800 --> 0:42:56.000
<v Speaker 1>allowed into the app store. The subcommittee also suggested that

0:42:56.160 --> 0:42:59.919
<v Speaker 1>platforms format data in such a way that the data

0:43:00.200 --> 0:43:04.120
<v Speaker 1>becomes easily portable. So, in other words, the data should

0:43:04.160 --> 0:43:08.160
<v Speaker 1>be platform agnostic. Now why would this matter, Well, one

0:43:08.239 --> 0:43:11.399
<v Speaker 1>of the big challenges that we see with these these

0:43:11.520 --> 0:43:14.680
<v Speaker 1>consolidated tech companies is that a lot of us as

0:43:14.840 --> 0:43:18.960
<v Speaker 1>users have a ton of stuff stored within these various

0:43:19.040 --> 0:43:24.160
<v Speaker 1>companies platforms. So, for example, I've got thousands of photos

0:43:24.280 --> 0:43:27.400
<v Speaker 1>and posts up on Facebook that creates a sort of

0:43:27.520 --> 0:43:31.719
<v Speaker 1>anchor to me for Facebook, Like I am stuck there.

0:43:32.160 --> 0:43:33.920
<v Speaker 1>It would not be easy for me to port that

0:43:34.000 --> 0:43:37.400
<v Speaker 1>stuff over to some other platform, even if there were

0:43:37.520 --> 0:43:39.600
<v Speaker 1>a platform out there that I felt was up to

0:43:39.680 --> 0:43:43.839
<v Speaker 1>the task of doing that. Making data portable would at least,

0:43:43.880 --> 0:43:46.920
<v Speaker 1>in theory, make it easier for users to move their

0:43:46.960 --> 0:43:50.440
<v Speaker 1>stuff from one platform to another if they really wanted to.

0:43:51.320 --> 0:43:55.800
<v Speaker 1>And this isn't really important, but I actually recently deactivated

0:43:55.880 --> 0:43:59.279
<v Speaker 1>my Facebook account. I've been conflicted about even being on

0:43:59.440 --> 0:44:02.360
<v Speaker 1>the platform for a few years now, but I stuck

0:44:02.400 --> 0:44:05.160
<v Speaker 1>with it because that's where all my friends and family

0:44:05.239 --> 0:44:07.279
<v Speaker 1>had a presence. But I kind of reached a point

0:44:07.320 --> 0:44:12.439
<v Speaker 1>where that just isn't enough, however, that's really tangential. Other

0:44:12.520 --> 0:44:17.000
<v Speaker 1>proposed reforms include more scrutiny for future mergers and acquisitions,

0:44:17.680 --> 0:44:21.719
<v Speaker 1>reaffirming the practice of safe harbor, which tells us that

0:44:21.960 --> 0:44:25.520
<v Speaker 1>a platform should not be held accountable for stuff that

0:44:25.680 --> 0:44:29.239
<v Speaker 1>other people have put up on that platform. If I

0:44:29.320 --> 0:44:32.759
<v Speaker 1>were to build a box on the street corner for

0:44:32.800 --> 0:44:35.680
<v Speaker 1>people to stand on, I would not be held responsible

0:44:35.840 --> 0:44:38.279
<v Speaker 1>if someone stood on there and said truly terrible things.

0:44:38.560 --> 0:44:40.439
<v Speaker 1>I just made the box. I didn't make the person

0:44:40.520 --> 0:44:43.960
<v Speaker 1>say the terrible things. That's safe harbor kind of, and

0:44:44.200 --> 0:44:47.520
<v Speaker 1>also placing more restrictions on using corporate power to coerce

0:44:47.600 --> 0:44:52.160
<v Speaker 1>companies into unfavorable business concessions because of a dominant market position.

0:44:52.760 --> 0:44:55.560
<v Speaker 1>The report also calls for strengthening of antitrust laws in

0:44:55.600 --> 0:44:58.680
<v Speaker 1>the United States, as well as a call for antitrust

0:44:58.840 --> 0:45:01.640
<v Speaker 1>enforcement in general, not just that we have the laws,

0:45:01.719 --> 0:45:04.440
<v Speaker 1>but we actually enforce them. After all, if you have

0:45:04.520 --> 0:45:07.240
<v Speaker 1>a law but you never enforce it, then it doesn't

0:45:07.400 --> 0:45:11.560
<v Speaker 1>really mean anything. It's just words on a page. The

0:45:11.680 --> 0:45:16.280
<v Speaker 1>report itself will not have any direct impact on those companies.

0:45:16.360 --> 0:45:19.719
<v Speaker 1>It does not carry with it any actions or punishments

0:45:19.760 --> 0:45:24.160
<v Speaker 1>beyond recommending that Congress take further steps that would allow

0:45:24.200 --> 0:45:29.080
<v Speaker 1>the government to intervene with companies like these. Those interventions

0:45:29.160 --> 0:45:33.400
<v Speaker 1>could potentially include really big actions, like an attempt to

0:45:33.600 --> 0:45:36.960
<v Speaker 1>break up those companies into smaller entities that focus on

0:45:37.080 --> 0:45:40.560
<v Speaker 1>specific lines of business, but that's something that will have

0:45:40.719 --> 0:45:44.080
<v Speaker 1>to wait for further action in the future. In the meantime,

0:45:44.239 --> 0:45:46.800
<v Speaker 1>the report is really just a call for more action,

0:45:46.960 --> 0:45:50.919
<v Speaker 1>not an action unto itself. Now, that's just a quick

0:45:51.080 --> 0:45:55.360
<v Speaker 1>glipse into the situation with antitrust legislation and technology in

0:45:55.440 --> 0:45:58.800
<v Speaker 1>the United States. Where the story goes next will depend

0:45:58.880 --> 0:46:01.080
<v Speaker 1>heavily on who is a charge of the government in

0:46:01.160 --> 0:46:04.200
<v Speaker 1>the future months and years. As I record this, we

0:46:04.280 --> 0:46:06.960
<v Speaker 1>don't know for sure who that's gonna be. And of course,

0:46:07.360 --> 0:46:10.799
<v Speaker 1>this episode focused solely on the United States. There are

0:46:10.920 --> 0:46:13.439
<v Speaker 1>other parts of the world, such as in Europe, where

0:46:13.480 --> 0:46:15.760
<v Speaker 1>fights like these have been going on for many years,

0:46:16.120 --> 0:46:20.920
<v Speaker 1>frequently resulting in large fines being placed against these companies

0:46:20.960 --> 0:46:24.600
<v Speaker 1>and other penalties. Will we see the monumental companies and

0:46:24.640 --> 0:46:28.960
<v Speaker 1>technology gets split up into smaller components. Will those components

0:46:29.080 --> 0:46:31.960
<v Speaker 1>just coalesce again in the future, much like a T

0:46:32.120 --> 0:46:34.920
<v Speaker 1>and T did over time, or will we see a

0:46:35.000 --> 0:46:40.000
<v Speaker 1>completely different tactic that leaves companies intact but places finds

0:46:40.040 --> 0:46:42.400
<v Speaker 1>and other penalties on them should they be found to

0:46:42.520 --> 0:46:46.719
<v Speaker 1>engage in anti competitive practices, or maybe nothing happens at all.

0:46:47.120 --> 0:46:49.880
<v Speaker 1>All of those are possibilities, and then there are others

0:46:49.920 --> 0:46:52.200
<v Speaker 1>on top of that. I don't have the answers to

0:46:52.280 --> 0:46:57.320
<v Speaker 1>these questions. I'm not entirely certain anyone in government does either,

0:46:57.880 --> 0:47:00.600
<v Speaker 1>but we'll have to wait and see. In the meantime,

0:47:01.000 --> 0:47:03.960
<v Speaker 1>If you have any questions or suggestions for topics I

0:47:03.960 --> 0:47:06.520
<v Speaker 1>should cover here on this show, reach out to me

0:47:06.880 --> 0:47:11.040
<v Speaker 1>on Twitter. The handle is text stuff h s W.

0:47:11.960 --> 0:47:20.120
<v Speaker 1>I'll talk to you again really soon. Y. Text Stuff

0:47:20.280 --> 0:47:23.400
<v Speaker 1>is an I Heart Radio production. For more podcasts from

0:47:23.440 --> 0:47:27.160
<v Speaker 1>my Heart Radio, visit the I heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

0:47:27.320 --> 0:47:29.320
<v Speaker 1>or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.