Read on Twitter
1. I read the Buck Report last night, which he's framing as a "third way".
I'm glad he hasn't endorsed the Cicilline report, but what he's proposing would lead to regulation of tech – even if he doesn't intend for that to happen.
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000174-fa7f-db77-abfe-fe7f5d740000
I'm glad he hasn't endorsed the Cicilline report, but what he's proposing would lead to regulation of tech – even if he doesn't intend for that to happen.
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000174-fa7f-db77-abfe-fe7f5d740000
2. First, it accepts all of the Cicilline report's findings without question or dissent. Loads of these are worked-backwards from Cicilline's conclusions – like the idea that it's *inherently* anticompetitive for the App Store being the only way to install apps on iOS devices.
3. Even thought it appears to reject explicit regulation of tech companies, that is what the outcomes of the proposals it makes would be. Essential facilities + a ban on "leveraging" applied to digital platforms would turn them into regulated utilities.
4. Data portability, which it endorses, needs massive regulatory oversight to actually function – Open Banking in the UK relates to a very simple, homogenous set of data, and it's taken years and needed a large regulator to work.
See our two-pager here. https://laweconcenter.org/resource/tldr-data-portability-the-costs-of-imposed-openness/
See our two-pager here. https://laweconcenter.org/resource/tldr-data-portability-the-costs-of-imposed-openness/
5. It's telling that it equates below-cost pricing with "predatory pricing", when below-cost pricing is often *pro*-competitive. Selling a Kindle for below-cost because you'll make it up on ebook sales later gives customers optionality – try before you pay the "full" cost.
6. Treating platforms as essential facilities – like they're railways or electricity networks – gives up both on existing competition and the *potential for* competition in digital markets.
These are not natural monopolies; regulating them like they are will get you sclerosis.
These are not natural monopolies; regulating them like they are will get you sclerosis.
7. Silver linings: he endorses more resources for the antitrust agencies (good!) and rejects the misnamed "Glass-Steagall for tech" – I explain why it's a misnomer and argue that it's a bad idea anyway here. https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/lawmaker-news/515381-the-folly-of-cicillines-glass-steagall-for-tech
8. But all in all, it's pretty worrying if Republicans see this and fall for the "fallacy of the false middle". All it would be is a longer route to regulating tech like it's a utility, with all the innovation and customer satisfaction people associate with railways and telcos.
9. Here's a great thread from @ProfWrightGMU on the proposals to shift the burden of proof in mergers to a "guilty until proven innocent" position. https://twitter.com/ProfWrightGMU/status/1313527854240542720
