FTC Gets Jurisdiction for Possible Facebook Antitrust Probe (wsj.com) 45
The Federal Trade Commission will lead any antitrust investigation into Facebook under an arrangement that gives the Justice Department chief oversight of Alphabet's Google, as the U.S. government gears up for scrutiny of the country's major tech companies over competition concerns. From a report: The FTC secured the rights to begin a potential investigation of Facebook and whether it has engaged in unlawful monopolistic practices as part of an agreement that allowed the Justice Department to take the reins in a Google probe, according to people familiar with the matter. The FTC and Justice Department share authority in enforcing U.S. antitrust law and at times must work out turf arrangements regarding which agency will handle what issues. FTC already has spent more than a year investigating Facebook on privacy issues related to how it handles users' data. That probe, however, doesn't focus on antitrust questions on whether Facebook is stifling competition in the digital realm. The fact that the commission formally secured jurisdiction on those issues suggests it is considering even more rigorous scrutiny of the social media giant.
Re: (Score:2)
Common carrier.... (Score:1, Informative)
If Facebook wants to be protected from liability for what it's users post, Facebook can't pick and chose what gets posted.
Either they're a common carrier or they're not.
(Yeah, it's really Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but the same principle applies...)
Your ISP is a common carrier Facebook is not... (Score:1)
Facebook is a communication platform, and does not claim immunity as they extensively police content for revenge porn, harrassment, and other bad behavior.
It is not Facebook's job to host neo-Nazi propagnda, or the ramblings of future mass shooters.
Facebook is not a common carrier, it is a private website, and the first amendment guarantees them the freedom to host or not host any content that they choose. It's scary how soon after Trump's election republicans have gone after our constitutionally protected
Re: (Score:2)
The point of free speech is to protect the speech that you disagree with. Because one day it may be your speech that is disagreed with. But you would have to use your brain to realize that, so figured I would help.
Re: (Score:2)
You do nothing to help your point by being a fascist. But you knew that.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Facebook can't pick and chose what gets posted.
There is no outside authority that has any right to regulate their content. Unless they can interfere with your connection to an alternative, they certainly can decide what goes up. They have every right. They are not an ISP.
Re: (Score:1)
More Moron Moderation.
It is precisely on topic. there is no legitimate antitrust case against any content provider on the internet. You have to prove real interference. Propaganda and data mining are not.
This is about censorship, but the morons prefer to believe the theatrics. Maybe because they are pro-censorship. This would explain what they are doing, trying to frame it as something else. They are producing a false narrative that unfortunately sells. If anything, putting antitrust and Facebook in the sam
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Who is Facebook's legitimate competitor?
Anybody that wants to be, even you. Facebook can't stop you, but your ISP can. Facebook can't block your connection to PirateBay, but your ISP can. See where the power really is? Maybe you can find some collusion between the two, but until then we have to leave Facebook alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Back to the actual topic... are you absolutely certain that Facebook has never engaged in anti-competitive behavior that has squashed those "anybody that wants to be" companies?
Re: (Score:1)
Nope, but you haven't proven otherwise. Innocent until proven guilty.
The diversion from the real power is on your part.
Facebook is nothing but a bottom feeder. That's where the gold is.
Re: (Score:2)
You contradicted yourself in the very next sentence.
Secondly. It's common industry knowledge that FB attempts to acquire companies it sees as a threat, and even leverages it's other properties to target those threats (metrics from its "free" mobile VPN). That should at least warrant an investigation, but it looks like you've already come to conclusions before seeing all the evidence.
Re: (Score:1)
They have a lot to prove. But until they can show interference with service provision, there is nothing there.
Investigations are fine, but contrary to my opinion about it, most people here have already convicted them, purely on the hype. And technically, the laws says they are innocent until proven guilty, in a court of law, not when the investigation begins.
To me the whole story is to push a false narrative to create a case against uncensored user content. This is something we can legitimately call FakeNew
Re: (Score:1)
Secondly. It's common industry knowledge that FB attempts to acquire companies it sees as a threat, and even leverages it's other properties to target those threats (metrics from its "free" mobile VPN).
So, punish them for being too successful? Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, but you haven't proven otherwise. Innocent until proven guilty.
Well, maybe that's why they're investigating?
Re: (Score:1)
XMPP isn't a Facebook competitor. It's not even a company; it's a protocol.
That's right. Run it on your computer, call some friends over, and voila! Instant Facebook, some assembly required, or java, or something...
Re: (Score:1)
Who is Facebook's legitimate competitor?
Seeing as how Facebook doesn't cost anything, I suspect there isn't much profit to be made in starting a competitor.
Re: (Score:2)
But we already know the answer.
Facebook develops *gasp* facebook and controls all *gasp* things facebook.
Google develops *gasp* google and controls all *gasp* things google.
But here's the kicker.
Neither company has a monopoly on anything.
Why you ask?
Because they only got as big as they are because of you and me. That's right, *We The People* control the size of both companies by the choices we make.
Use Facebook - well, Facebook just got bigger. Use Google services, well, Google just got bigger.
If the Justice Department doesn't like that we actually can control the size of both corporations, they can shove it up their collective asses.
Do you work for Ticketmaster? Anti-trust should be pushed much harder than it currently is in most industries. Consolidation has left just a few choices in far too many categories.
Hey, Wonderful... (Score:1)
...lets let the gov't destroy FB, so the Chinese can pick up the pieces and beat us to death with them. Maybe nuke Amazon, Wikipedia, and Google too... If you thought censorship was bad before, wait 'til those commies get hold of it.