WEBVTT - How Big Tech Is Losing Their Antitrust Trials feat. Jason Kint

0:00:02.480 --> 0:00:07.160
<v Speaker 1>Also media, I get on their ass. Somebody's got to

0:00:07.160 --> 0:00:21.479
<v Speaker 1>do it. This is better offly and I'm d Zetron.

0:00:21.720 --> 0:00:24.640
<v Speaker 1>Today I'm joined by the wonderful Jason Kint, who has

0:00:24.680 --> 0:00:29.120
<v Speaker 1>been at the Google ads trial and multiple other FDC

0:00:29.240 --> 0:00:32.080
<v Speaker 1>and DOJ related trials as well. Now, last week we

0:00:32.159 --> 0:00:34.360
<v Speaker 1>have wonderful news the Department of Justice won their ant

0:00:34.440 --> 0:00:36.720
<v Speaker 1>trust trial against Google saying they have a monopoly of

0:00:36.760 --> 0:00:39.440
<v Speaker 1>our ad tech. This is a wonderful time. And Jason,

0:00:39.479 --> 0:00:41.960
<v Speaker 1>of course last year was here for multiple episodes with

0:00:42.040 --> 0:00:43.760
<v Speaker 1>us to walk us through the trial. He was there

0:00:43.760 --> 0:00:45.440
<v Speaker 1>in person. Jason, how are you doing.

0:00:46.360 --> 0:00:49.080
<v Speaker 2>I'm good, thank you. It's good to see decisions starting

0:00:49.120 --> 0:00:50.839
<v Speaker 2>to come in from the courts on what we've been

0:00:50.880 --> 0:00:51.400
<v Speaker 2>talking about.

0:00:52.200 --> 0:00:54.000
<v Speaker 1>And just to be clear, Jason as the CEO of

0:00:54.000 --> 0:00:56.240
<v Speaker 1>Digital Content Next, I did not say that The Top

0:00:56.400 --> 0:01:00.279
<v Speaker 1>the professional podcast run by a professional, but soll us

0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:01.240
<v Speaker 1>through what the verdict was.

0:01:02.480 --> 0:01:05.880
<v Speaker 2>This is the ad tech case against Google that was

0:01:05.920 --> 0:01:10.880
<v Speaker 2>in Virginia, to remind the listeners, and it was around

0:01:11.000 --> 0:01:14.800
<v Speaker 2>Google having market power and monopoly power on the buy side,

0:01:14.840 --> 0:01:18.120
<v Speaker 2>the cell side and in the exchange and then illegally

0:01:18.240 --> 0:01:22.600
<v Speaker 2>using that monopoly power. The decision from the judge was

0:01:22.760 --> 0:01:25.920
<v Speaker 2>that mostly in agreement with the plaintiffs, and it was

0:01:25.959 --> 0:01:27.959
<v Speaker 2>a big win for the Justice Department, who worked really

0:01:28.000 --> 0:01:31.360
<v Speaker 2>hard on this case. That they have monopoly power in

0:01:31.440 --> 0:01:34.480
<v Speaker 2>the exchange, so where the auctions actually happen, and then

0:01:34.520 --> 0:01:38.680
<v Speaker 2>on the publisher side with the ads server marketplace that

0:01:38.800 --> 0:01:41.880
<v Speaker 2>determines what ads land on the page, and that they

0:01:41.920 --> 0:01:46.440
<v Speaker 2>illegally tied those two products together. So the only part

0:01:46.440 --> 0:01:49.040
<v Speaker 2>of the decision, which I think Google's trying to make

0:01:49.120 --> 0:01:51.640
<v Speaker 2>to be a bigger deal than it probably is, is

0:01:52.040 --> 0:01:54.200
<v Speaker 2>that they the judge did not agree that there was

0:01:54.240 --> 0:01:57.480
<v Speaker 2>this market on the buy side the way it was defined.

0:01:57.960 --> 0:02:00.880
<v Speaker 1>And so what does that mean in simple in.

0:02:00.840 --> 0:02:05.960
<v Speaker 2>Simpler terms, it could affect where remedies go because there

0:02:06.040 --> 0:02:10.440
<v Speaker 2>is not a finding that they illegally use monopoly power

0:02:10.480 --> 0:02:14.639
<v Speaker 2>on the buy side with advertisers buying ads, and so.

0:02:14.919 --> 0:02:17.640
<v Speaker 1>Just they owned the technology to sell the ads and

0:02:17.840 --> 0:02:20.400
<v Speaker 1>the ways in which it was like, I guess.

0:02:22.000 --> 0:02:27.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, they still it's true that they have significant influence

0:02:27.280 --> 0:02:30.320
<v Speaker 2>because they have they're the largest player on the buy

0:02:30.440 --> 0:02:33.400
<v Speaker 2>side of ads, so where advertisers are actually buying the ads,

0:02:34.160 --> 0:02:36.560
<v Speaker 2>but not that they She didn't find that they that

0:02:36.600 --> 0:02:39.840
<v Speaker 2>there was a form legal market there that they abused,

0:02:40.280 --> 0:02:44.320
<v Speaker 2>and so as we go through remedies discussions, I think

0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:46.799
<v Speaker 2>it's probably it might be less likely that there's some

0:02:46.840 --> 0:02:49.160
<v Speaker 2>sort of structural separation where they need to divest the

0:02:49.200 --> 0:02:51.960
<v Speaker 2>buy side too, although all this stuff's frankly going to

0:02:51.960 --> 0:02:54.080
<v Speaker 2>get tangled together and it will be a whole new

0:02:54.080 --> 0:02:57.480
<v Speaker 2>ball game with remedies, especially with search meedies going on

0:02:57.520 --> 0:02:58.000
<v Speaker 2>this week too.

0:02:58.120 --> 0:02:58.639
<v Speaker 3>So go ahead.

0:02:58.880 --> 0:03:01.320
<v Speaker 1>I was going to say, so, what are the remedies

0:03:01.320 --> 0:03:03.359
<v Speaker 1>that the Department of Justice is actually seeking.

0:03:03.080 --> 0:03:06.560
<v Speaker 2>Here on the ad tech case? On this case, it's

0:03:06.639 --> 0:03:12.040
<v Speaker 2>a structural separation of their roles in the ad tech marketplace,

0:03:12.760 --> 0:03:15.320
<v Speaker 2>and so that was very clear coming into the into

0:03:15.360 --> 0:03:15.880
<v Speaker 2>the trial.

0:03:16.639 --> 0:03:18.760
<v Speaker 1>So just break it down for me, though, what they

0:03:19.000 --> 0:03:21.280
<v Speaker 1>How would they break up Google in its current form?

0:03:21.440 --> 0:03:22.480
<v Speaker 1>Is that even possible?

0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:27.320
<v Speaker 2>I mean yes, absolutely in the in the simplest way

0:03:27.360 --> 0:03:33.160
<v Speaker 2>would be forcing Google to divest, which probably would mean

0:03:33.840 --> 0:03:37.160
<v Speaker 2>spinning off to its shareholders rather than selling because it's

0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:39.160
<v Speaker 2>going to be such a valuable asset.

0:03:40.040 --> 0:03:42.560
<v Speaker 3>But actually a separate company.

0:03:42.280 --> 0:03:45.840
<v Speaker 2>A separate company that is the ad server marketplace. Yeah,

0:03:45.920 --> 0:03:48.200
<v Speaker 2>and in the exchange itself too.

0:03:48.240 --> 0:03:51.000
<v Speaker 1>So so dumb guy question for you, what is an

0:03:51.040 --> 0:03:53.360
<v Speaker 1>AD server in this case? Like, how how does this

0:03:53.440 --> 0:03:54.320
<v Speaker 1>actually break down?

0:03:54.760 --> 0:03:57.520
<v Speaker 2>It's the you know, it's the technology that sits on

0:03:57.640 --> 0:04:01.480
<v Speaker 2>the web pages or on the public sure side, that

0:04:01.640 --> 0:04:05.240
<v Speaker 2>actually makes the decision on what ad to serve on

0:04:05.280 --> 0:04:08.000
<v Speaker 2>the page. So when you're browsing a web page or

0:04:08.040 --> 0:04:11.119
<v Speaker 2>on an app, it's what's deciding to serve the ad.

0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:16.400
<v Speaker 1>And so Google ran that themselves. They like, they ran

0:04:16.440 --> 0:04:18.760
<v Speaker 1>that themselves, So they ended up prioritizing their own ads.

0:04:18.760 --> 0:04:22.320
<v Speaker 2>I'm guessing yes, that's that's the case. And so and

0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:25.880
<v Speaker 2>you know, in the findings, what's really interesting is that

0:04:25.920 --> 0:04:30.280
<v Speaker 2>the judge very much agreed with and understood that Google's

0:04:30.400 --> 0:04:33.960
<v Speaker 2>illegal conduct in terms of how they were able to

0:04:34.000 --> 0:04:39.799
<v Speaker 2>manipulate auctions in ways that probably favored them and certainly

0:04:39.839 --> 0:04:42.640
<v Speaker 2>harmed the publishers was a part of the finding.

0:04:42.760 --> 0:04:46.279
<v Speaker 1>So, yeah, when they when you say they harmed the publishers,

0:04:46.320 --> 0:04:48.560
<v Speaker 1>is it just the it wasn't possible to compete with

0:04:48.600 --> 0:04:51.880
<v Speaker 1>Google on ads because Google both made ads and then

0:04:52.200 --> 0:04:54.160
<v Speaker 1>had the platform that showed the ads to people.

0:04:54.800 --> 0:04:56.400
<v Speaker 2>You know, she she hit on a number of things

0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:58.120
<v Speaker 2>that I think are gonna be super interesting in the remedies.

0:04:58.160 --> 0:05:01.080
<v Speaker 2>She hit on that Google was able to keep charging

0:05:01.120 --> 0:05:06.040
<v Speaker 2>twenty percent of the exchange market, so they could take

0:05:06.080 --> 0:05:08.920
<v Speaker 2>twenty percent of every single transaction, and that that price

0:05:09.480 --> 0:05:11.560
<v Speaker 2>never moved from twenty percent for the most part because

0:05:11.600 --> 0:05:14.640
<v Speaker 2>of their monopoly power. But she also hit on all

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:17.520
<v Speaker 2>the ways that they could manipulate the auctions, which could

0:05:17.560 --> 0:05:19.800
<v Speaker 2>end up being that's a bigger issue when you start

0:05:19.800 --> 0:05:22.840
<v Speaker 2>thinking about the private lawsuits they're out there too. You

0:05:22.880 --> 0:05:25.880
<v Speaker 2>get into, you know, literally tens of tens of billions

0:05:25.880 --> 0:05:32.840
<v Speaker 2>of dollars of potential harm to publishers from auction manipulations.

0:05:32.200 --> 0:05:34.440
<v Speaker 1>And how were they manipulating your auctions?

0:05:34.480 --> 0:05:39.440
<v Speaker 2>Just so we understand, well, the allegations were that and

0:05:40.440 --> 0:05:44.240
<v Speaker 2>this in what she addressed in the opinion were things

0:05:44.440 --> 0:05:48.320
<v Speaker 2>like first look and last look where they actually were

0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:55.920
<v Speaker 2>able to see the prices ahead of time or at

0:05:55.960 --> 0:05:58.560
<v Speaker 2>the end of the auction and make decisions based on

0:05:59.040 --> 0:06:02.080
<v Speaker 2>the bids that they uniquely were able to.

0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:02.480
<v Speaker 3>Do, which is.

0:06:04.160 --> 0:06:06.279
<v Speaker 1>Which is so insane that they were able to like

0:06:06.360 --> 0:06:10.039
<v Speaker 1>they basically set prices like get to everyone to bid

0:06:10.080 --> 0:06:13.640
<v Speaker 1>and then just immediately beat them. Like it's it's shocking,

0:06:14.000 --> 0:06:14.600
<v Speaker 1>that's the thing.

0:06:14.920 --> 0:06:16.040
<v Speaker 3>It's kind of flagrant.

0:06:16.600 --> 0:06:19.160
<v Speaker 2>So with last Look, I think, you know, I think

0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:21.400
<v Speaker 2>I've hit on two things here. One of the last look,

0:06:21.720 --> 0:06:23.680
<v Speaker 2>which I think the judge very much understood because I

0:06:23.680 --> 0:06:26.640
<v Speaker 2>can remember her, you know, who was completely new to

0:06:26.680 --> 0:06:31.480
<v Speaker 2>this marketplace. She totally got why that was an issue

0:06:31.560 --> 0:06:34.279
<v Speaker 2>when she you know, last look. If you take to

0:06:34.400 --> 0:06:37.040
<v Speaker 2>like a silent auction where you put your little bids

0:06:37.040 --> 0:06:39.160
<v Speaker 2>down in an envelope and everybody has kind of their

0:06:39.200 --> 0:06:42.160
<v Speaker 2>secret bid, this would be like Google. Then at the

0:06:42.240 --> 0:06:44.200
<v Speaker 2>end was able to look at everybody's bid, see what

0:06:44.240 --> 0:06:47.120
<v Speaker 2>the highest bid was, and then bid higher if they wanted.

0:06:47.200 --> 0:06:49.800
<v Speaker 2>That was last Look, And there were a bunch of

0:06:49.839 --> 0:06:52.279
<v Speaker 2>other things that stemmed from that, and she really seemed

0:06:52.279 --> 0:06:54.520
<v Speaker 2>to understand it, which is what is it's you know,

0:06:54.560 --> 0:06:55.479
<v Speaker 2>it's nice to.

0:06:55.480 --> 0:06:58.000
<v Speaker 1>See so kind of impressive to see a judge just

0:06:58.040 --> 0:06:59.280
<v Speaker 1>pick up an entire subject.

0:06:59.360 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 3>Matt to like that.

0:07:00.040 --> 0:07:02.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I totally agree. You know what, who I'd be

0:07:03.279 --> 0:07:06.800
<v Speaker 2>should be most scared, frankly by this opinion, is if

0:07:06.839 --> 0:07:09.920
<v Speaker 2>I'm Facebook or Meta, who is like counting on this

0:07:10.040 --> 0:07:12.960
<v Speaker 2>idea that the judge in their case doesn't know or

0:07:13.080 --> 0:07:16.080
<v Speaker 2>use social media and TikTok and Instagram, et cetera. It

0:07:16.120 --> 0:07:19.680
<v Speaker 2>tells you once again that a judge that understands the

0:07:19.800 --> 0:07:23.240
<v Speaker 2>law and sits there for four weeks plus all the

0:07:23.280 --> 0:07:28.320
<v Speaker 2>pre trial stuff and listens to the evidence can understand

0:07:28.320 --> 0:07:30.760
<v Speaker 2>these issues. And the most important greening I think was

0:07:30.760 --> 0:07:34.960
<v Speaker 2>the Justice Department who really understood the case in a

0:07:34.960 --> 0:07:37.320
<v Speaker 2>way that they could dive deep and then explain it

0:07:37.360 --> 0:07:39.640
<v Speaker 2>to the judge. And they succeeded to do that.

0:07:41.160 --> 0:07:43.640
<v Speaker 1>So it kind of reminds me so during some of

0:07:43.680 --> 0:07:47.000
<v Speaker 1>the Google ads trial things you talked about the spaghetti thing,

0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:48.960
<v Speaker 1>when they are trying to do this kind of slight

0:07:49.000 --> 0:07:51.640
<v Speaker 1>of hand thing and like, ah, it's too impossible to understand,

0:07:53.040 --> 0:07:55.880
<v Speaker 1>it's too complex, and they turned it into that ridiculous thing.

0:07:57.000 --> 0:07:59.400
<v Speaker 2>That's right, they did, And yeah, and that tells you

0:07:59.480 --> 0:08:02.320
<v Speaker 2>that that is not going to be a successful defense.

0:08:02.680 --> 0:08:07.280
<v Speaker 2>Is trying to confuse a judge who has never used it,

0:08:07.360 --> 0:08:09.880
<v Speaker 2>we would understand add tech, that's not going to work.

0:08:10.040 --> 0:08:13.320
<v Speaker 2>The just departments succeeded and explaining it. They kept it simple.

0:08:25.880 --> 0:08:28.400
<v Speaker 1>So what happens next? What are the next moves with

0:08:28.480 --> 0:08:29.720
<v Speaker 1>this pub Well.

0:08:29.640 --> 0:08:33.520
<v Speaker 2>A reminder, this is what's called the rocket docket. The

0:08:33.640 --> 0:08:37.520
<v Speaker 2>Virginia District Eastern District of Virginia. And so the judge

0:08:37.559 --> 0:08:39.840
<v Speaker 2>moved really really fast. That's why they have that name.

0:08:40.200 --> 0:08:43.760
<v Speaker 2>This case was filed in January of twenty twenty three,

0:08:43.880 --> 0:08:46.400
<v Speaker 2>and so we got to a trial, you know, eighteen

0:08:46.400 --> 0:08:49.200
<v Speaker 2>months later, in a decision that took you know, frankly,

0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:51.200
<v Speaker 2>the decision took a lot longer than anyone thought it

0:08:51.240 --> 0:08:53.680
<v Speaker 2>was going to take to come out. People are starting

0:08:53.679 --> 0:08:55.160
<v Speaker 2>to get nervous, but you know, it just took time.

0:08:55.200 --> 0:08:59.040
<v Speaker 2>And she clearly wrote a really clear opinion and it's

0:08:59.440 --> 0:09:04.600
<v Speaker 2>very it's very easy to read through. So that keeping

0:09:04.600 --> 0:09:07.800
<v Speaker 2>in mind, I think she'll probably move fast. They have

0:09:07.840 --> 0:09:12.480
<v Speaker 2>a meeting. I think it'll be tomorrow in terms of

0:09:12.520 --> 0:09:15.960
<v Speaker 2>what's the schedule going forward for remedies, and so I

0:09:15.960 --> 0:09:18.079
<v Speaker 2>would expect the dates to all be in the next

0:09:18.120 --> 0:09:18.640
<v Speaker 2>few months.

0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:20.240
<v Speaker 3>But what would the remedies be?

0:09:20.360 --> 0:09:23.000
<v Speaker 1>So they would have to break off the three parts,

0:09:23.080 --> 0:09:25.400
<v Speaker 1>like the AD side, they would have to break off

0:09:25.440 --> 0:09:26.679
<v Speaker 1>the cell side, Like.

0:09:26.640 --> 0:09:28.640
<v Speaker 3>What are they going to have to do in theory?

0:09:28.640 --> 0:09:29.800
<v Speaker 3>I realize you're just guessing.

0:09:30.840 --> 0:09:34.400
<v Speaker 2>I'm just guessing. You know that the findings are clear

0:09:34.520 --> 0:09:37.360
<v Speaker 2>enough that there's going to be structural separation that they're

0:09:37.400 --> 0:09:41.920
<v Speaker 2>going to be pushing for you know, how the buyside

0:09:41.960 --> 0:09:46.000
<v Speaker 2>gets handled, it's going to be really important because a reminder,

0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:49.240
<v Speaker 2>and this doesn't come out really in the proceedings as much,

0:09:50.080 --> 0:09:53.600
<v Speaker 2>but the ad tech case is downstream from the Search case,

0:09:54.440 --> 0:09:57.839
<v Speaker 2>and the arguments were that the reason Google was able

0:09:57.880 --> 0:10:01.080
<v Speaker 2>to dominate the buy side, the cell side, and ad

0:10:01.120 --> 0:10:04.600
<v Speaker 2>tech was because of the monopoly power in search, which

0:10:04.640 --> 0:10:08.000
<v Speaker 2>we also have remedies now that started on Monday, and

0:10:08.040 --> 0:10:11.480
<v Speaker 2>so these things are going to start to swirl together.

0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:14.240
<v Speaker 2>And when you think about Google having to divest Chrome

0:10:14.360 --> 0:10:16.640
<v Speaker 2>and some of the other remedies within the search case,

0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:19.200
<v Speaker 2>it's you know, it's quite possible that there will be

0:10:19.240 --> 0:10:24.800
<v Speaker 2>some larger settlement that will be proposed, or a larger

0:10:24.840 --> 0:10:28.599
<v Speaker 2>structural separation that needs to play out between the two decisions.

0:10:30.000 --> 0:10:33.079
<v Speaker 1>So as as you've been hinting at, there was the

0:10:33.080 --> 0:10:35.760
<v Speaker 1>there was the verdict last year that Google did have

0:10:35.760 --> 0:10:38.560
<v Speaker 1>a monopoly over search. How do you think that these

0:10:38.600 --> 0:10:40.400
<v Speaker 1>two things are going to play together? You kind of

0:10:40.400 --> 0:10:42.600
<v Speaker 1>got it there, But what are the ways in which

0:10:42.640 --> 0:10:43.120
<v Speaker 1>this could go?

0:10:43.800 --> 0:10:47.040
<v Speaker 2>Well, the search decision was not There were two monopolies

0:10:47.080 --> 0:10:50.480
<v Speaker 2>that they were found of abused. One was searched. The

0:10:50.520 --> 0:10:53.840
<v Speaker 2>other was search text ads. So it's the ads that

0:10:53.880 --> 0:10:58.160
<v Speaker 2>we see in search, which is Google's largest business, right

0:10:58.200 --> 0:11:00.920
<v Speaker 2>And so.

0:10:59.840 --> 0:11:02.640
<v Speaker 1>Just so I'm clear, you're saying that there's the monopoly

0:11:02.679 --> 0:11:06.119
<v Speaker 1>over a search engine and then the advertising onset search.

0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:10.719
<v Speaker 2>Engine exactly, and so and that advertising on said sir,

0:11:11.320 --> 0:11:15.959
<v Speaker 2>that advertising on said search engine is is what allowed them,

0:11:16.000 --> 0:11:18.440
<v Speaker 2>according to the JUST Department, to then dominate in the

0:11:18.480 --> 0:11:21.840
<v Speaker 2>ad tech stack. And so I think that's the connection

0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:25.520
<v Speaker 2>point between the cases and will also start to be

0:11:25.559 --> 0:11:28.400
<v Speaker 2>a part of the discussion in the remedies. Both cases

0:11:28.440 --> 0:11:34.480
<v Speaker 2>involve network effects. Both cases involve using data to to

0:11:34.679 --> 0:11:37.680
<v Speaker 2>maintain market power and to abuse it.

0:11:38.679 --> 0:11:41.960
<v Speaker 1>Right, So the potential remedies, it sounds like, could be

0:11:42.520 --> 0:11:45.760
<v Speaker 1>almost breaking up Google into multiple different companies.

0:11:47.160 --> 0:11:51.640
<v Speaker 2>With this case, the the baby bells, you know, idea

0:11:51.679 --> 0:11:55.120
<v Speaker 2>of what happened to AT and T should be much.

0:11:55.040 --> 0:11:56.760
<v Speaker 3>More happily than to several listeners.

0:11:57.440 --> 0:12:01.560
<v Speaker 2>They divided AT and T up into into pieces and

0:12:01.600 --> 0:12:04.840
<v Speaker 2>so so you know, not just forcing them to vest

0:12:04.920 --> 0:12:07.600
<v Speaker 2>one piece of their business. And so you know, with

0:12:07.640 --> 0:12:10.960
<v Speaker 2>the ad tech case, again there's you know, there's settlements

0:12:10.960 --> 0:12:13.520
<v Speaker 2>that can happen, there's appeals that will happen. But the

0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:18.440
<v Speaker 2>argument for you know, should Google have to divest not

0:12:18.520 --> 0:12:23.480
<v Speaker 2>just its advertising ad tech business, but also you know,

0:12:23.760 --> 0:12:27.200
<v Speaker 2>other areas of its business, I think becomes much stronger.

0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:29.360
<v Speaker 2>You can imagine Chrome, you can imagine Android, you can

0:12:29.360 --> 0:12:30.480
<v Speaker 2>imagine YouTube.

0:12:31.000 --> 0:12:33.120
<v Speaker 3>Yeah. Actually, here's a good question for you.

0:12:33.679 --> 0:12:37.160
<v Speaker 1>I I know Chrome, and I'm sure many listeners know

0:12:37.280 --> 0:12:40.760
<v Speaker 1>Chrome as a free browser, not really a business entity.

0:12:41.120 --> 0:12:44.720
<v Speaker 1>How does selling off Chrome meaningfully help with the monopoly

0:12:45.440 --> 0:12:46.600
<v Speaker 1>situation Chrome?

0:12:46.920 --> 0:12:52.040
<v Speaker 2>You know, Google's entire advertising business is based on targeting

0:12:52.160 --> 0:12:56.120
<v Speaker 2>ads based on signals that it in, data that it

0:12:56.200 --> 0:13:00.600
<v Speaker 2>gathers from the various ways that it can touch the user.

0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:05.800
<v Speaker 2>And so Chrome as a web browser is an incredible

0:13:05.880 --> 0:13:09.960
<v Speaker 2>way to harvest data about how you're browsing the web

0:13:10.800 --> 0:13:14.240
<v Speaker 2>and where you are location, search, et cetera. And so

0:13:15.040 --> 0:13:17.240
<v Speaker 2>you know where Google believes it has permission to use

0:13:17.280 --> 0:13:20.280
<v Speaker 2>that data to target ads and train its into its

0:13:20.280 --> 0:13:23.560
<v Speaker 2>machine learning and AI training. That is very valuable.

0:13:24.640 --> 0:13:28.160
<v Speaker 1>I did so, wait, so this is perhaps I'm very stupid.

0:13:28.280 --> 0:13:31.880
<v Speaker 1>So Chrome collects data on your browsing habits for every user.

0:13:32.400 --> 0:13:35.480
<v Speaker 2>Now, for every user, there's there's privacy, you know, settings

0:13:35.520 --> 0:13:37.120
<v Speaker 2>and all sorts of things you can do. You can

0:13:37.160 --> 0:13:43.120
<v Speaker 2>go into incognito mode. But if Google is acting as

0:13:43.160 --> 0:13:48.040
<v Speaker 2>your browser, it has access to your browsing history and

0:13:48.240 --> 0:13:51.240
<v Speaker 2>what you're doing on the web, and they can, where

0:13:51.280 --> 0:13:54.360
<v Speaker 2>they believe they have the rights, they can use that data.

0:13:55.000 --> 0:14:01.200
<v Speaker 2>Two help you know, provide further information on both both

0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:04.440
<v Speaker 2>for search but also for you know, what content to

0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:07.040
<v Speaker 2>serve up and what adds to serve up. What they're

0:14:07.080 --> 0:14:09.400
<v Speaker 2>actually doing becomes a bigger question.

0:14:10.040 --> 0:14:14.640
<v Speaker 1>Right, So was that established a whole trial not.

0:14:15.120 --> 0:14:17.600
<v Speaker 2>It was in the search in the search case that

0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:24.040
<v Speaker 2>but it was more specifically focused on the default settings

0:14:23.640 --> 0:14:28.560
<v Speaker 2>for search from the browser, right. And so within Chrome,

0:14:28.640 --> 0:14:30.480
<v Speaker 2>if you type in your location bar, you're always going

0:14:30.520 --> 0:14:33.640
<v Speaker 2>to be doing a Google search. That's it's pretty clear

0:14:33.680 --> 0:14:35.800
<v Speaker 2>that how that le then gets passed from the browser

0:14:35.840 --> 0:14:36.760
<v Speaker 2>to the search engine.

0:14:37.360 --> 0:14:39.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and if they have billions of users, then they

0:14:39.920 --> 0:14:43.120
<v Speaker 1>can think everyone is searching using Google because they have

0:14:43.240 --> 0:14:46.280
<v Speaker 1>because it's the default. That's so crazy. But the thing

0:14:46.320 --> 0:14:48.640
<v Speaker 1>with Chrome as well, isn't a revenue driver? Is that

0:14:49.720 --> 0:14:52.320
<v Speaker 1>like a direct source of revenue for Google?

0:14:52.720 --> 0:14:55.440
<v Speaker 2>You know, it's if you if you think about the

0:14:55.440 --> 0:14:58.520
<v Speaker 2>search case again, I mean Google is paying Apple, you know,

0:14:58.560 --> 0:15:03.280
<v Speaker 2>twenty five billion dollars. Let's say I'm estimating twenty It

0:15:03.320 --> 0:15:05.400
<v Speaker 2>was twenty billion a few years ago, but let's say

0:15:05.400 --> 0:15:07.640
<v Speaker 2>twenty five billion dollars. They were paying to Apple to

0:15:07.680 --> 0:15:10.680
<v Speaker 2>be the default search on Safari and all of the

0:15:10.720 --> 0:15:16.560
<v Speaker 2>access points on iOS. So Chrome technically is making revenue

0:15:16.680 --> 0:15:21.480
<v Speaker 2>off of those search queries. It's just Google's pain itself, right,

0:15:21.520 --> 0:15:24.720
<v Speaker 2>And so that's the that's the issue.

0:15:25.440 --> 0:15:27.040
<v Speaker 1>Well, the reason I bring that up is one of

0:15:27.040 --> 0:15:30.120
<v Speaker 1>the remedies the idea of selling Chrome off. Why would

0:15:30.120 --> 0:15:32.720
<v Speaker 1>you like, what value would that be in Chrome? If

0:15:32.720 --> 0:15:34.480
<v Speaker 1>the whole value of it is to just be kind

0:15:34.520 --> 0:15:38.640
<v Speaker 1>of a flume towards Google, like a like a kind

0:15:38.880 --> 0:15:41.360
<v Speaker 1>like a way to like almost like a marketing arm

0:15:41.400 --> 0:15:44.040
<v Speaker 1>of Google. If you sold off Chrome, surely it wouldn't

0:15:44.080 --> 0:15:45.600
<v Speaker 1>have as much business value.

0:15:46.040 --> 0:15:47.840
<v Speaker 2>It wouldn't have as much business value to Google. The

0:15:47.840 --> 0:15:49.600
<v Speaker 2>whole point would be it be an independent business that

0:15:49.640 --> 0:15:53.400
<v Speaker 2>would be making decisions. I mean, technically a browser is

0:15:53.400 --> 0:15:55.520
<v Speaker 2>supposed to be a user agent. It's supposed to be

0:15:56.240 --> 0:15:58.800
<v Speaker 2>making decisions for the user. And what would they.

0:15:58.880 --> 0:15:59.720
<v Speaker 3>Value right.

0:16:02.480 --> 0:16:06.040
<v Speaker 1>As an autonomous business? Like yeah, because right now is

0:16:06.440 --> 0:16:08.280
<v Speaker 1>it's not like people pay for creat It just doesn't

0:16:08.320 --> 0:16:10.800
<v Speaker 1>feel like that is a practical thing to do, because

0:16:10.800 --> 0:16:13.000
<v Speaker 1>if the whole value proposition of it is that it's

0:16:13.000 --> 0:16:15.840
<v Speaker 1>a free product that makes Google money and it doesn't

0:16:15.880 --> 0:16:18.560
<v Speaker 1>make any money for anyone else, or like it isn't

0:16:18.680 --> 0:16:19.400
<v Speaker 1>you know what I mean?

0:16:20.200 --> 0:16:22.360
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so it could make a decision to point to

0:16:23.120 --> 0:16:28.360
<v Speaker 2>you know, a new Amazon search site or sure that

0:16:28.480 --> 0:16:30.840
<v Speaker 2>gets into search, right and so and get paid.

0:16:30.720 --> 0:16:33.280
<v Speaker 3>For it, right Yeah.

0:16:33.400 --> 0:16:35.880
<v Speaker 1>I mean it almost feels like this could lead to

0:16:36.200 --> 0:16:37.680
<v Speaker 1>I don't want I'm not going to say the death

0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:39.840
<v Speaker 1>of Google in the sense that Google will cease to be,

0:16:40.000 --> 0:16:43.480
<v Speaker 1>but the death of modern Google as we know it.

0:16:43.480 --> 0:16:48.160
<v Speaker 2>It definitely, you know, all leads towards a very different Google,

0:16:48.800 --> 0:16:52.320
<v Speaker 2>whether it be structurally different or just being hamstrung by

0:16:52.880 --> 0:16:55.000
<v Speaker 2>the appeals of all these cases.

0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 1>So, I mean, it's they. I cannot think of anyone

0:16:59.440 --> 0:17:02.400
<v Speaker 1>who got more lucky than it being good Friday than

0:17:02.480 --> 0:17:05.040
<v Speaker 1>Google right now, because it's good, we're recording this a

0:17:05.080 --> 0:17:08.840
<v Speaker 1>good Friday. And it's like they didn't like the markets

0:17:08.880 --> 0:17:11.399
<v Speaker 1>are closed, so they didn't immediately get the markets just

0:17:11.480 --> 0:17:14.600
<v Speaker 1>pummeling them as they should because they've lost both now

0:17:15.040 --> 0:17:17.919
<v Speaker 1>they don't like whatever appeals they may do, are not

0:17:18.040 --> 0:17:21.480
<v Speaker 1>going to really, I don't think they're going to stop everything.

0:17:22.840 --> 0:17:26.359
<v Speaker 2>Markets are complex, I would I would hesitate to wonder

0:17:26.400 --> 0:17:29.359
<v Speaker 2>and you know, to predict why the stock did what

0:17:29.359 --> 0:17:31.919
<v Speaker 2>it did yesterday, even when the announcement came out. You know,

0:17:32.000 --> 0:17:34.480
<v Speaker 2>there are some arguments that having to divest, you know,

0:17:34.560 --> 0:17:37.320
<v Speaker 2>divest parts of the business could actually create more value

0:17:37.359 --> 0:17:38.280
<v Speaker 2>back to shareholders.

0:17:39.680 --> 0:17:40.639
<v Speaker 3>What value would that be?

0:17:42.160 --> 0:17:46.160
<v Speaker 2>Well, typically when you spin things off, you often see

0:17:46.160 --> 0:17:48.760
<v Speaker 2>it or you sell things, often the stock you know,

0:17:48.840 --> 0:17:52.199
<v Speaker 2>can go up because of that. And so you know,

0:17:52.440 --> 0:17:54.280
<v Speaker 2>are the is the some of the parts worth more

0:17:54.400 --> 0:17:56.360
<v Speaker 2>than than the whole? You know, those questions all come

0:17:56.359 --> 0:18:00.639
<v Speaker 2>into play, But that's all. Yeah, that's all to the markets.

0:18:00.640 --> 0:18:02.800
<v Speaker 2>And sometimes the markets aren't as smart as we think

0:18:02.840 --> 0:18:05.119
<v Speaker 2>they are, and they take time to understand and impact things.

0:18:19.880 --> 0:18:22.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I agree, and I've seen the same thing with

0:18:22.640 --> 0:18:24.840
<v Speaker 1>Core Weeve recently, which is a company that has driven

0:18:24.880 --> 0:18:29.199
<v Speaker 1>me insane onto more sane things. Though, So when we're

0:18:29.400 --> 0:18:31.320
<v Speaker 1>recording this, it's going to be next week, but the

0:18:31.640 --> 0:18:34.399
<v Speaker 1>beginning of the remedies for the search trial is on

0:18:34.720 --> 0:18:37.040
<v Speaker 1>the twenty first, So what can people expect there?

0:18:37.800 --> 0:18:39.560
<v Speaker 2>I don't think there's gonna be as much excitement and

0:18:39.640 --> 0:18:43.280
<v Speaker 2>drama as we saw with the actual liabilities trial. I think,

0:18:44.000 --> 0:18:47.159
<v Speaker 2>you know, for the folks that follow the industry closely,

0:18:47.680 --> 0:18:51.040
<v Speaker 2>what you should expect is all the AI companies are

0:18:52.000 --> 0:18:58.160
<v Speaker 2>involved and so either through depositions, discovery, and some testifying.

0:18:58.280 --> 0:19:02.520
<v Speaker 2>So you've got anthropic open AI Microsoft. So when you

0:19:02.520 --> 0:19:06.040
<v Speaker 2>think about the shaping of the AI world going forward,

0:19:06.320 --> 0:19:09.679
<v Speaker 2>you're going to have all the major players. Apple is

0:19:10.760 --> 0:19:16.320
<v Speaker 2>Apple tried to actually intervene, and but the judge didn't

0:19:16.320 --> 0:19:19.720
<v Speaker 2>allow them. So they've they've got a strong interest because

0:19:19.720 --> 0:19:22.679
<v Speaker 2>they've got estimated to be I think ten to fifteen

0:19:22.720 --> 0:19:26.120
<v Speaker 2>percent of their profits are tied to their Google deal.

0:19:26.040 --> 0:19:29.160
<v Speaker 1>Right, and so well, because Google pays them to use

0:19:29.680 --> 0:19:33.679
<v Speaker 1>just just for the listeners, so Google pays Apple billions

0:19:34.080 --> 0:19:37.000
<v Speaker 1>have to be the default such, right, That's right, and.

0:19:37.040 --> 0:19:39.679
<v Speaker 2>The you know, the remedies are that they can't do

0:19:39.760 --> 0:19:43.440
<v Speaker 2>that anymore. And so the reason they weren't allowed to intervene,

0:19:43.520 --> 0:19:46.399
<v Speaker 2>according to Judge Meta, was because he didn't see a

0:19:46.440 --> 0:19:50.200
<v Speaker 2>difference in Apple's interests from Google's interests. He basically said, yeah,

0:19:50.240 --> 0:19:51.359
<v Speaker 2>you have the same interest.

0:19:51.640 --> 0:19:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, well, I mean the interest being the Apple needs

0:19:55.320 --> 0:19:56.720
<v Speaker 1>Google to keep them and not police so that the

0:19:56.720 --> 0:19:58.960
<v Speaker 1>Apple can keep getting a chunk of their revenue.

0:19:59.080 --> 0:20:02.960
<v Speaker 2>That's exactly right. Yeah, so yeah, so Apple cares a lot,

0:20:03.040 --> 0:20:06.320
<v Speaker 2>Microsoft cares a lot, All the big players care. The

0:20:06.480 --> 0:20:09.840
<v Speaker 2>testimonies is going to be X, a lot of experts

0:20:10.160 --> 0:20:13.040
<v Speaker 2>and you know, unless CEO.

0:20:12.320 --> 0:20:14.200
<v Speaker 1>Who will be doing the testimonies.

0:20:14.840 --> 0:20:18.760
<v Speaker 2>It'll be experts from both sides, like so academics that

0:20:18.920 --> 0:20:23.320
<v Speaker 2>study these issues. It will be executives from the AI companies.

0:20:24.359 --> 0:20:28.960
<v Speaker 2>I think we'll probably hear from Eddie Q again at Apple,

0:20:29.600 --> 0:20:32.480
<v Speaker 2>who's one of their top executives. We'll probably hear from

0:20:32.520 --> 0:20:36.280
<v Speaker 2>Suon Dharbashi again from Google as CEO. They're on the list.

0:20:36.560 --> 0:20:39.400
<v Speaker 1>So and so in those two weeks, what's going to happen.

0:20:39.440 --> 0:20:42.120
<v Speaker 1>So it's basically another trial to say how they will

0:20:42.119 --> 0:20:43.639
<v Speaker 1>deal with their monopoly in search.

0:20:44.359 --> 0:20:46.159
<v Speaker 2>That's right, And well, I mean, I guess one thing

0:20:46.200 --> 0:20:49.800
<v Speaker 2>that's interesting is they're still pretty far apart. So Google's

0:20:49.840 --> 0:20:53.439
<v Speaker 2>proposed remedies for itself are basically a slap on the wrist,

0:20:54.080 --> 0:20:57.880
<v Speaker 2>and you know, kind of kind of embarrassing for anybody,

0:20:57.960 --> 0:20:59.520
<v Speaker 2>and you know that studies they think.

0:20:59.400 --> 0:21:00.600
<v Speaker 3>So when you said up on the wrist.

0:21:00.760 --> 0:21:04.840
<v Speaker 1>Is it like a fine that offering.

0:21:04.880 --> 0:21:09.800
<v Speaker 2>They're offering some restrictions on the way they do things,

0:21:09.840 --> 0:21:14.680
<v Speaker 2>but nothing that touches on structural separation in any way,

0:21:14.720 --> 0:21:18.040
<v Speaker 2>shape or form. Nothing that prevents them from doing an

0:21:18.080 --> 0:21:24.000
<v Speaker 2>Apple like deal. And so it's, you know, the bare minimum.

0:21:24.320 --> 0:21:26.760
<v Speaker 2>That the only way I can read it, and I'm

0:21:26.800 --> 0:21:31.239
<v Speaker 2>just you know, spitballing here, but is that they're not

0:21:31.240 --> 0:21:33.600
<v Speaker 2>giving it an inch right now because they think either

0:21:34.320 --> 0:21:37.720
<v Speaker 2>they can do some sort of transactional deal settlement with

0:21:37.840 --> 0:21:40.960
<v Speaker 2>the current administration or that they can win on appeal,

0:21:41.160 --> 0:21:44.160
<v Speaker 2>and they don't want to show their cards by moving

0:21:44.200 --> 0:21:47.159
<v Speaker 2>the line in any way because it's so far removed

0:21:47.160 --> 0:21:48.720
<v Speaker 2>from the decision itself.

0:21:49.160 --> 0:21:52.280
<v Speaker 1>Right, because if they go defensive, then they would cut

0:21:52.480 --> 0:21:54.639
<v Speaker 1>they would kind of reveal their hand for when they

0:21:54.680 --> 0:21:55.320
<v Speaker 1>go to appeal.

0:21:55.400 --> 0:21:57.720
<v Speaker 3>You're saying that's right, that's right.

0:21:57.560 --> 0:21:59.560
<v Speaker 1>And so is the Department of Justice. The Department of

0:21:59.680 --> 0:22:01.800
<v Speaker 1>Justice is saying they should sell off Chrome or is

0:22:01.840 --> 0:22:03.440
<v Speaker 1>that anything else they're asking for?

0:22:04.080 --> 0:22:06.320
<v Speaker 2>They should sell off Chrome, and they're struck, you know,

0:22:06.359 --> 0:22:09.960
<v Speaker 2>divest Chrome. They may need to divest Android, but it

0:22:09.960 --> 0:22:13.040
<v Speaker 2>basically says, let's see how that goes, but we can

0:22:13.080 --> 0:22:18.600
<v Speaker 2>still do that, and then very importantly, they're requiring them

0:22:18.640 --> 0:22:23.680
<v Speaker 2>to share some data with other search engines that would

0:22:23.720 --> 0:22:26.920
<v Speaker 2>help other search engines have a more level playing field.

0:22:27.440 --> 0:22:31.840
<v Speaker 2>And as it relates to publishers, who again I do

0:22:31.920 --> 0:22:33.679
<v Speaker 2>a lot of work for the work for the publishers,

0:22:34.520 --> 0:22:42.840
<v Speaker 2>it requires Google to allow publishers to narrowly define what

0:22:43.280 --> 0:22:47.520
<v Speaker 2>Google can crawl and use data for. And so the

0:22:47.520 --> 0:22:50.399
<v Speaker 2>publisher can say, hey, you can crawl my website for

0:22:50.440 --> 0:22:52.919
<v Speaker 2>the purpose of search, but you cannot then use it

0:22:53.000 --> 0:22:56.120
<v Speaker 2>to train your your AI engines.

0:22:57.200 --> 0:23:00.720
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, and so that the DO is pushing to

0:23:00.720 --> 0:23:01.720
<v Speaker 1>make sure that's the case.

0:23:02.040 --> 0:23:05.880
<v Speaker 2>The DJ is very smartly understanding that if they don't

0:23:06.200 --> 0:23:11.760
<v Speaker 2>put real constraints on Google round AI, then they're only

0:23:11.800 --> 0:23:15.639
<v Speaker 2>addressing past behavior, but they're not actually making sure that

0:23:15.680 --> 0:23:18.359
<v Speaker 2>there's a level playing you field going forward in which

0:23:18.440 --> 0:23:20.640
<v Speaker 2>people won't be able to just abuse and run over

0:23:20.640 --> 0:23:21.760
<v Speaker 2>the AI marketplace too.

0:23:23.080 --> 0:23:25.320
<v Speaker 1>It really feels like we're kind of on the precipice

0:23:25.359 --> 0:23:27.560
<v Speaker 1>of something changing in the next few years with the web,

0:23:27.880 --> 0:23:32.359
<v Speaker 1>because if Google has to even share data from search,

0:23:32.880 --> 0:23:35.840
<v Speaker 1>that will change, like we will get competition in search

0:23:35.880 --> 0:23:39.920
<v Speaker 1>for the first time really meaningfully in decade, like decades.

0:23:39.960 --> 0:23:42.440
<v Speaker 1>I guess it's like since the lycost and old Tavista

0:23:42.520 --> 0:23:46.960
<v Speaker 1>days because these two cases are so inherently intertwined.

0:23:47.960 --> 0:23:53.080
<v Speaker 2>Absolutely, yeah, and don't and don't shot change Gopher or

0:23:53.200 --> 0:23:57.480
<v Speaker 2>web crawler in that Yeah, but yeah, there hasn't been

0:23:58.160 --> 0:23:59.880
<v Speaker 2>other search engine since the late nineties.

0:24:00.400 --> 0:24:04.800
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, Oh no, I said, I think I said excite, like, yeah, okay,

0:24:04.960 --> 0:24:07.719
<v Speaker 1>changing changing gis before we wrap up. You've been at

0:24:07.760 --> 0:24:11.240
<v Speaker 1>the FTC case with Meta. How's that going? And also

0:24:11.280 --> 0:24:12.119
<v Speaker 1>what is that about?

0:24:12.920 --> 0:24:17.520
<v Speaker 2>So that is about whether or not when Meta and

0:24:17.720 --> 0:24:22.720
<v Speaker 2>Facebook at the time acquired Instagram and WhatsApp, that they

0:24:22.760 --> 0:24:26.840
<v Speaker 2>were doing that to maintain their monopoly power in a

0:24:26.960 --> 0:24:32.199
<v Speaker 2>market for personal social networking services. And so that's that

0:24:32.320 --> 0:24:35.840
<v Speaker 2>is actually explicitly to break up Meta, so force them

0:24:35.880 --> 0:24:41.480
<v Speaker 2>to divest WhatsApp and Instagram. And the testimony I saw

0:24:41.600 --> 0:24:45.080
<v Speaker 2>was Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO, who was on the stand

0:24:45.119 --> 0:24:47.960
<v Speaker 2>for roughly seven or eight hours, which is a lot

0:24:48.000 --> 0:24:51.080
<v Speaker 2>for any CEO. He's he's the key witness, and so

0:24:51.240 --> 0:24:53.640
<v Speaker 2>now they're rolling into the other witnesses. I think it's

0:24:53.680 --> 0:24:56.600
<v Speaker 2>going well to answer your question, Yeah.

0:24:55.960 --> 0:24:57.840
<v Speaker 1>So what are some of the highlights of things that

0:24:57.920 --> 0:24:58.800
<v Speaker 1>Marcky Mack said.

0:25:01.040 --> 0:25:04.200
<v Speaker 2>He you know, he confirmed there's a lot of emails

0:25:04.280 --> 0:25:07.240
<v Speaker 2>in that case, and unlike the Google case, where there

0:25:07.320 --> 0:25:10.719
<v Speaker 2>was real problems with preservation of evidence and there were

0:25:10.760 --> 0:25:13.360
<v Speaker 2>emails that were in messaging that were deleted and all

0:25:13.400 --> 0:25:15.960
<v Speaker 2>sorts of things that by the way, Google's Kent Walker

0:25:16.080 --> 0:25:19.960
<v Speaker 2>got slammed by the judge for for not preserving evidence

0:25:20.359 --> 0:25:21.680
<v Speaker 2>for like the third or fourth time.

0:25:21.720 --> 0:25:25.359
<v Speaker 1>Now, and you mentioned that Jurigar interviews as well, that

0:25:25.400 --> 0:25:26.800
<v Speaker 1>the judge pissed about this.

0:25:27.200 --> 0:25:30.360
<v Speaker 2>The judge was pissed and it came out in her opinion. Yeah,

0:25:30.440 --> 0:25:34.320
<v Speaker 2>that's abuse of attorney client privilege. She basically said. The

0:25:34.359 --> 0:25:36.119
<v Speaker 2>only the way I read it was the only reason

0:25:36.160 --> 0:25:38.919
<v Speaker 2>I'm not sanctioning you is because I found you liable

0:25:38.920 --> 0:25:41.440
<v Speaker 2>of breaking the Sherman Act. So and that's kind of

0:25:41.480 --> 0:25:43.880
<v Speaker 2>what happened in the Search case too, and it's kind

0:25:43.880 --> 0:25:45.880
<v Speaker 2>of in the app Store case they did get sanctioned.

0:25:45.880 --> 0:25:50.000
<v Speaker 2>So there's the third anti trust uh loss that Google

0:25:50.080 --> 0:25:52.760
<v Speaker 2>has in which they've been you know, nailed by the

0:25:52.880 --> 0:25:55.360
<v Speaker 2>judge and they've got more trials coming, so it's it's

0:25:55.400 --> 0:25:59.040
<v Speaker 2>a problem for them. And so the difference the flip

0:25:59.040 --> 0:26:02.439
<v Speaker 2>side of that is that Facebook and Meta. You know,

0:26:02.520 --> 0:26:06.359
<v Speaker 2>there's a wealth of emails, and you know, Mark clearly

0:26:06.440 --> 0:26:09.680
<v Speaker 2>ran the company very tightly and drove the product decisions

0:26:09.760 --> 0:26:12.879
<v Speaker 2>very tightly, and he documented a lot of that in emails,

0:26:13.200 --> 0:26:15.080
<v Speaker 2>and some of them are pretty damning, you know. I

0:26:15.119 --> 0:26:17.440
<v Speaker 2>think the one that has always gotten the most attention

0:26:18.520 --> 0:26:22.040
<v Speaker 2>is emails where he discussed why would we buy Instagram

0:26:22.880 --> 0:26:27.119
<v Speaker 2>and focused in on the reasons of neutralizing a competitor

0:26:27.280 --> 0:26:33.120
<v Speaker 2>and buying time. So neutralizing Instagram and buying time, and

0:26:33.440 --> 0:26:37.640
<v Speaker 2>a lot of the contemporary contemporaneous evidence shows that they

0:26:37.640 --> 0:26:42.560
<v Speaker 2>were very, very concerned over one year to eighteen month

0:26:42.640 --> 0:26:47.320
<v Speaker 2>period where Facebook was behind and moving to mobile, Instagram

0:26:47.359 --> 0:26:50.159
<v Speaker 2>was growing very very quickly, and they had screwed up

0:26:50.200 --> 0:26:53.840
<v Speaker 2>by building the Facebook app for HTML five that's a

0:26:53.840 --> 0:26:56.320
<v Speaker 2>technical thing, instead of their own native app, and they

0:26:56.320 --> 0:27:00.440
<v Speaker 2>were freaking out. And there's a lot of emails about that.

0:27:00.440 --> 0:27:01.200
<v Speaker 3>That's fascinating.

0:27:01.280 --> 0:27:05.760
<v Speaker 1>So really kind of returning to what I was saying

0:27:05.800 --> 0:27:08.280
<v Speaker 1>previously as well, it feels like the results of these

0:27:08.320 --> 0:27:11.560
<v Speaker 1>trials could just fundamentally rebuild the web because if Instagram

0:27:11.720 --> 0:27:15.200
<v Speaker 1>was competitive with Facebook, by which I mean they had

0:27:15.240 --> 0:27:17.359
<v Speaker 1>to spin it off and make it its own company,

0:27:17.640 --> 0:27:20.080
<v Speaker 1>and Google could no longer monopolize all the parts of

0:27:20.119 --> 0:27:22.960
<v Speaker 1>the ads. It's going to change the economics of everything

0:27:23.080 --> 0:27:26.280
<v Speaker 1>underlying the Internet because the Internet is mostly paidful by ads.

0:27:27.240 --> 0:27:29.920
<v Speaker 2>That's right. That last parts really really important that you're

0:27:29.920 --> 0:27:31.800
<v Speaker 2>making is Yeah, we're talking about a lot of the

0:27:31.920 --> 0:27:34.959
<v Speaker 2>user behaviors and stuff. But there's one hundred and whatever

0:27:35.000 --> 0:27:39.800
<v Speaker 2>forty billion dollars of US digital advertising that goes to

0:27:39.840 --> 0:27:43.879
<v Speaker 2>those two companies I would get estimating. And so most

0:27:43.880 --> 0:27:46.520
<v Speaker 2>of the growth in digital advertising over the last decade

0:27:46.560 --> 0:27:49.120
<v Speaker 2>has gone to Google and Facebook in some way, shape

0:27:49.200 --> 0:27:52.479
<v Speaker 2>or form. And so, how does it affect the advertising business?

0:27:52.520 --> 0:27:53.960
<v Speaker 2>Becomes really really important to all.

0:27:53.920 --> 0:27:57.159
<v Speaker 1>Us, and the way it would affect it is it

0:27:57.200 --> 0:27:59.640
<v Speaker 1>could be cheaper for advertising, but it could also be

0:28:01.000 --> 0:28:06.080
<v Speaker 1>more chaotic because especially with metas advertising products. From what

0:28:06.119 --> 0:28:09.639
<v Speaker 1>I understand, it's like almost the equivalent of Google MACS

0:28:10.040 --> 0:28:12.840
<v Speaker 1>in that you put you give meta money and it

0:28:12.880 --> 0:28:15.280
<v Speaker 1>goes into the greater metaverse. I don't mean I mean

0:28:15.280 --> 0:28:17.359
<v Speaker 1>that with a cap Yeah, damn, I can't say that shit,

0:28:17.680 --> 0:28:21.159
<v Speaker 1>but goes into the data meta series of products in

0:28:21.200 --> 0:28:23.200
<v Speaker 1>the same way that Google MACS. You put money in

0:28:23.240 --> 0:28:25.920
<v Speaker 1>and it goes across all of Google's stuff. That being

0:28:25.960 --> 0:28:29.080
<v Speaker 1>broken up would be like Google like ninety something percent

0:28:29.160 --> 0:28:31.920
<v Speaker 1>of metas revenue is ads as well, Like this was

0:28:32.000 --> 0:28:33.800
<v Speaker 1>right destroy the company potentially.

0:28:34.480 --> 0:28:37.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, they you know, they're ninety six ninety seven percent

0:28:37.000 --> 0:28:40.480
<v Speaker 2>of their business is advertising, and so you imagine a

0:28:40.520 --> 0:28:45.720
<v Speaker 2>world where advertisers are buying through a different buy platform

0:28:45.880 --> 0:28:48.960
<v Speaker 2>or a neutral one. Let's call it a neutral one

0:28:48.960 --> 0:28:52.840
<v Speaker 2>that actually can buy ads on Instagram versus the Facebook

0:28:52.880 --> 0:28:56.280
<v Speaker 2>app and actually make decisions on that in real time

0:28:56.320 --> 0:28:57.880
<v Speaker 2>of what's best for the advertiser.

0:28:58.920 --> 0:29:01.280
<v Speaker 1>I feel like they're also have to compete for business

0:29:01.280 --> 0:29:03.160
<v Speaker 1>in the way they've never had to, like justify their

0:29:03.160 --> 0:29:05.800
<v Speaker 1>business and provide analytics that they don't already.

0:29:06.080 --> 0:29:08.520
<v Speaker 2>I've always asked a question of like when Facebook started

0:29:08.520 --> 0:29:13.000
<v Speaker 2>to you know, really getscribed as a toxic waste jump

0:29:13.040 --> 0:29:15.920
<v Speaker 2>in like put like twenty eighteen, twenty nineteen, where they

0:29:15.920 --> 0:29:19.760
<v Speaker 2>started to just run into some real difficulties like Instagram.

0:29:19.880 --> 0:29:21.680
<v Speaker 2>If I were Instagram, I would act differently if I

0:29:21.720 --> 0:29:25.400
<v Speaker 2>wasn't part of the of the larger corporation, right, and

0:29:26.640 --> 0:29:28.880
<v Speaker 2>they probably Instagram would have put the screws to Facebook

0:29:28.920 --> 0:29:31.520
<v Speaker 2>at that time and vice versa, you know, and so

0:29:32.280 --> 0:29:35.000
<v Speaker 2>it really changes the dynamic of those two platforms where

0:29:35.000 --> 0:29:37.680
<v Speaker 2>they're actually having to compete with each other, both for

0:29:37.920 --> 0:29:42.760
<v Speaker 2>users and for ads. The parent company, the brand is

0:29:42.800 --> 0:29:45.080
<v Speaker 2>you know, one of the least you know, according to

0:29:45.120 --> 0:29:49.480
<v Speaker 2>like the Axios Reputation survey, it's like number ninety nine

0:29:49.600 --> 0:29:51.479
<v Speaker 2>or something like that in the hundred brands. So like,

0:29:51.560 --> 0:29:56.560
<v Speaker 2>the brand is significantly challenged despite the success of the company.

0:29:56.680 --> 0:30:00.680
<v Speaker 1>So so as we wrap up it almost I know

0:30:00.760 --> 0:30:03.719
<v Speaker 1>that we like this show is not necessarily the most optimistic,

0:30:03.800 --> 0:30:06.640
<v Speaker 1>but I kind of feel a little optimistic seeing all

0:30:06.680 --> 0:30:08.800
<v Speaker 1>of this stuff. It feels like there could be a

0:30:08.800 --> 0:30:10.560
<v Speaker 1>better Internet that comes out of it.

0:30:12.400 --> 0:30:15.000
<v Speaker 2>I agree with that, and I also, you know, make

0:30:15.040 --> 0:30:18.719
<v Speaker 2>a broader point that it does make me optimistic to

0:30:18.720 --> 0:30:22.440
<v Speaker 2>see courts doing what they're supposed to be doing, judges

0:30:22.520 --> 0:30:28.040
<v Speaker 2>actually understanding the complexity of technology, having you know, attorneys

0:30:28.080 --> 0:30:30.440
<v Speaker 2>that can describe it to the courts in a way

0:30:30.480 --> 0:30:33.200
<v Speaker 2>that that you know, can be applied to anti trust

0:30:33.240 --> 0:30:36.040
<v Speaker 2>law that's been around for more than a century. And

0:30:36.320 --> 0:30:38.320
<v Speaker 2>by the way, it should be said too that these

0:30:38.320 --> 0:30:41.240
<v Speaker 2>cases were brought by the Trump administration through a Biden

0:30:41.280 --> 0:30:45.080
<v Speaker 2>administration administration. Now they're being enforced and we're getting decisions

0:30:45.120 --> 0:30:49.480
<v Speaker 2>under a Trump administration again. So they're incredibly bipartisan. And

0:30:49.520 --> 0:30:51.360
<v Speaker 2>I had a chance to testify a few weeks ago

0:30:51.400 --> 0:30:53.360
<v Speaker 2>in front of the Anti Trust Committee and that was

0:30:53.400 --> 0:30:57.160
<v Speaker 2>incredibly bipartisan too. And so these are these are issues

0:30:57.160 --> 0:30:59.840
<v Speaker 2>that stretch across the parties, that are pretty unique in

0:30:59.840 --> 0:31:03.560
<v Speaker 2>this in this current moment, and it.

0:31:03.560 --> 0:31:07.240
<v Speaker 1>Kind of feels like that the Dumerists out there are saying, oh,

0:31:07.480 --> 0:31:10.120
<v Speaker 1>he'll they'll just pay off Trump. But and it doesn't

0:31:10.120 --> 0:31:13.280
<v Speaker 1>even feel it feels like the administrations, both of them

0:31:13.360 --> 0:31:15.240
<v Speaker 1>kind of have the same willingness to.

0:31:15.200 --> 0:31:17.760
<v Speaker 3>Do this, that's right. I mean the Wall Street Journal

0:31:17.760 --> 0:31:18.959
<v Speaker 3>report basically we don't know.

0:31:19.360 --> 0:31:21.440
<v Speaker 2>Well, yeah, but the Wall Street General reported that that

0:31:22.080 --> 0:31:26.160
<v Speaker 2>Mark Zuckerberg met with the Trump with Trump administration or

0:31:26.160 --> 0:31:28.600
<v Speaker 2>Trump himself I think three times in the last few

0:31:28.600 --> 0:31:32.720
<v Speaker 2>months and offered to settle for four hundred and fifty

0:31:32.720 --> 0:31:37.400
<v Speaker 2>million dollars and the FCC wanted thirty billion dollars. And

0:31:37.440 --> 0:31:39.840
<v Speaker 2>so you can see that there's a pretty pretty big

0:31:39.880 --> 0:31:43.600
<v Speaker 2>delta between the two. And I think the Trump administration

0:31:43.720 --> 0:31:48.400
<v Speaker 2>understands why these issues are issues regardless of party in

0:31:48.440 --> 0:31:52.360
<v Speaker 2>politics and too much power in the hands of you know,

0:31:52.400 --> 0:31:53.920
<v Speaker 2>too little people is always.

0:31:53.640 --> 0:31:56.720
<v Speaker 1>A problem, so can the greenlaw. All right, Jason, where

0:31:56.720 --> 0:31:57.440
<v Speaker 1>can people find you?

0:31:58.320 --> 0:32:01.360
<v Speaker 2>They could buy me on Twitter, Jason Underscore kids on

0:32:01.480 --> 0:32:05.320
<v Speaker 2>Blue Sky. They can always email me at dcn's website.

0:32:05.560 --> 0:32:07.600
<v Speaker 2>I'm around, I'm always looking to engage, so.

0:32:07.640 --> 0:32:08.360
<v Speaker 3>Thank you very much.

0:32:08.760 --> 0:32:10.400
<v Speaker 1>Such a pleasure to have you, sir. And you can

0:32:10.480 --> 0:32:12.320
<v Speaker 1>of course find me on the internet at Google the

0:32:12.360 --> 0:32:15.320
<v Speaker 1>man who killed Google Search. That's how you find me.

0:32:15.480 --> 0:32:17.400
<v Speaker 1>This has been Better Offline. I'm at Zitron.

0:32:17.520 --> 0:32:17.880
<v Speaker 3>Thank you.

0:32:17.880 --> 0:32:20.080
<v Speaker 1>You're going to hear a very similar message to follow.

0:32:28.040 --> 0:32:29.720
<v Speaker 1>Thank you for listening to Better Offline.

0:32:29.840 --> 0:32:32.280
<v Speaker 4>The editor and composer of the Better Offline theme song

0:32:32.360 --> 0:32:35.000
<v Speaker 4>is Matasowski. You can check out more of his music

0:32:35.040 --> 0:32:38.680
<v Speaker 4>and audio projects at Matasowski dot com, M A T

0:32:38.680 --> 0:32:43.120
<v Speaker 4>T O S O W s ki dot com. You

0:32:43.160 --> 0:32:45.680
<v Speaker 4>can email me at easy at Better offline dot com,

0:32:45.760 --> 0:32:48.080
<v Speaker 4>or visit Better Offline dot com to find more podcast

0:32:48.120 --> 0:32:51.440
<v Speaker 4>links and of course my newsletter. I also really recommend

0:32:51.480 --> 0:32:53.400
<v Speaker 4>you go to chat dot Where's youreed dot at to

0:32:53.520 --> 0:32:56.320
<v Speaker 4>visit the discord, and go to our slash Better Offline

0:32:56.320 --> 0:32:59.560
<v Speaker 4>to check out our Reddit, Thank you so much for listening.

0:33:00.400 --> 0:33:02.880
<v Speaker 2>Better Offline is a production of cool Zone Media.

0:33:03.000 --> 0:33:06.400
<v Speaker 4>For more from cool Zone Media, visit our website coolzonmedia

0:33:06.440 --> 0:33:09.240
<v Speaker 4>dot com, or check us out on the iHeartRadio app,

0:33:09.320 --> 0:33:11.720
<v Speaker 4>Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.