Amazon Cloud Unit Draws Antitrust Scrutiny From Khan's FTC (bloomberg.com) 14
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is pushing forward with antitrust scrutiny of Amazon's cloud computing business, according to Bloomberg News. From the report: Lina Khan, the head of the agency and a vocal critic of the online retailer, is advancing a probe started several years ago by her predecessor. FTC investigators have contacted companies in the past few months to gather information about competition issues related to Amazon Web Services, said the people, who declined to be named because they weren't authorized to speak publicly about the outreach. At least one of the contacts was as recent as the past few weeks, said one of the people.
Cue Jeff Bezos shouting: (Score:4, Funny)
"Kha...an!" in 3... 2... 1...
PS: the extra 'a's fell victim of Slashdot's ASCII art filter.
You don't mess with the head of the FTC (Score:2)
Or you'll feel The Wrath of Khan.
Re: (Score:2)
Or you'll feel The Wrath of Khan.
It's Christmas time, so perhaps it'll be The Wreath of Khan.
[Anyone care to offer an "elevator pitch" for this Star Trek holiday movie?]
Not "if" but "how much". (Score:3, Interesting)
There's absolutely no question in anyone's mind that Amazon is extremely anti-competitive, the question is just, how much can they take them for.
And even then, the fines that will most likely follow will just be a 'cost of doing shady business' blip on their radar.
Unless fines start going up to 100% of annual income, they're going to remain irrelevant.
A wonderful solution (Score:3, Interesting)
There's a wonderful 2-part solution:
The first prevents this from turning back into "cost of doing business" where you can sell a bit of stock to pay for your profits. If you put everyone making money suddenly on the hook, you can bet change will happen fast, as people dump stock on reports companies are misbehaving (as they-personally will be liable), or sue the company for damages.
** Addendum (Score:3)
I meant to add: This assumes this is a problem anyone (who can) actually wants to solve. I would not. With "CODB" fines, the company makes money, the government makes money, the people in charge can claim they've done something, people who otherwise don't care can reassure themselves something has been done, and the few left aren't enough to matter.
Anything else would cost those-involved money. The thought of implementing the above would likely scare the crap out of everyone involved.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you're a complete moron and don't understand what a "corporation" is, sure.
And if you ignore that you can't, because rule of law. You can't fine people for something that was legal when they did it.
This is just a typical, "if I was King" type of power fantasy where you throw away the rules and smash the people you think are responsible.
Very weak sauce.
Re: (Score:2)
Florida has no masks, no mandates and of the lowest hospitalization rates I the US right now
Sure if you want to ignore Florida is 3rd in cases and deaths all time. But that's like saying I am the fastest runner in the 100m race if you know count distances from 35 to 40m
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there's Florida's China-like action of just not publishing any data when it looks bad.
Funny how that sort of thing happens in red states.
Re: (Score:1)
Learn how to set your fucking agent string, neckbeard.
Profile of Lina Khan (Score:2)