Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#121

Post by katbyte »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #83
dsr_ wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FTC could, potentially, require: 1. That FB split into N independent companies, whereupon each share of FB would become 1 share in each of N companies. 2. That the supermajor shareholders (say, more than 10% of any company) each pick at most one company to retain that interest in, and sell off shares in the other companies until they had less than 10% of each of those). 3. That the new companies avoid overlapping…

And then it would eventually come back together. See ATT. https://money.cnn.com/infographic/technology/att-merger-hist...

But are there not multiple phone companies now instead of just one?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#122

Post by dane-pgp »

apozem wrote: post #62

> The complaint also alleges that Facebook, over many years, has imposed anticompetitive conditions on third-party software developers’ access to valuable interconnections to its platform, such as the application programming interfaces (“APIs”) that allow the developers’ apps to interface with Facebook. In particular, Facebook allegedly has made key APIs available to third-party applications only on the condition tha…

> On one hand, forcing Facebook to open up its social graph would have serious privacy implications.

There shouldn't be much additional privacy concern with a Facebook user saying "I trust user Alice and service example.com, so please send all my posts to alice@example.com using ActivityPub."

Similarly, Alice should be able to tell example.com that she trusts the Facebook user Bob with ID 123456789, so that example.com sends her posts to Facebook addressed to Bob (perhaps authenticated with a pre-shared key that Bob emailed her).

Once users are free to move between providers, those providers can compete based on their level of privacy and security, which right now Facebook has little incentive to improve.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#123

Post by smashah »

WhatsApp can just be considered as worldwide communications infrastructure. More important than text/calls. No way should all of that be in the control of one single (also cretinous) company.

Good luck on this one America. I have low expectations but high hopes.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#124

Post by jsinai »

jdminhbg wrote: post #78
jb1991 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iMessage, Slack, Teams These don’t really compete with WhatsApp, which is cross platform, not tied to an employer, doesn’t require an invitation, subscription, friend network, setup to use, among other things.

No, they do compete with WhatsApp, on the basis of those points of differentiation.

Whatsapp has near universal market penetration globally, especially in countries where most people can’t afford iPhones and use iMessage.

Even in countries where iPhones are ubiquitous the cross-platform nature of Whatsapp and the fact that everyone from your friend to your grandmother is on it, makes it dominant.

Yes you could use Slack to message your friends like you would on Whatsapp. The experience won’t be the same, and setup will be a hurdle. But would you use Whatsapp to replace Slack at work?

I think the term “compete” is used very broadly here.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#125

Post by dillondoyle »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #88

The most interesting part to developers: they may require facebook to offer certain APIs? > The complaint also alleges that Facebook, over many years, has imposed anticompetitive conditions on third-party software developers’ access to valuable interconnections to its platform, such as the application programming interfaces (“APIs”) that allow the developers’ apps to interface with Facebook. In particular, Facebook a…

This to me is the only compelling argument and I personally hope the government makes this successfully. Trying to look at IG/WhatsApp acquisitions is dumb imho.

But FB has consistently introduced open APIs and features, let them gain traction, then shut them down and replicated the most popular features.

I have been burned multiple times. Most recently new restrictions on Messaging.

If FB was mandated to restore some APIs possible make new ones for interoperability (while keeping the privacy changes over the years) that would be super super valuable to help other companies make value without trying some fruitless and probably not sound breakup.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#126

Post by bawolff »

lbsnake7 wrote: post #30

When Facebook first went public, an older relative asked me if he should invest in Facebook. My only insight was being an internet user at the time and I said no, there was no reason that Facebook wouldn’t be another MySpace. Facebook's only value was their users and users were historically very finicky and moved around platforms at will. I argued that Facebook would make no money and wouldn’t be around in a couple o…

In hindsight, i think a big part is that myspace's reach extended mostly to early adopter internet users. Early adopters jump on ships early, but also jump off easily too. Once everyone's parents and grandparents jumped on to facebook, that's a much better moat.

FB buying up the competition probably helped too.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#127

Post by thebigman433 »

djrogers wrote: post #112
justapassenger wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know it's a pipe dream, but an independent Oculus would make me so happy While that would cool for short-term, independent Oculus can stagnate. VR still needs many more billions to be truly usable, and I don't think independent company will be able to fund it.

> independent Oculus can stagnate My experience has been that technology is far more likely to stagnate at BigCo than SmallCo - especially if SmallCo's only source of revenue is said technology.

I think down the line that would be true, but Facebook's willingness to burn literal billions of dollars at this point is basically the only thing carrying VR. Id love to see it split off in the future though.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#128

Post by kieranmaine »

nickpp wrote: post #35

Monopoly of what? Some other social networks I use every day or so: Twitter, LinkedIn, TikTok and various forums and communities like this one, which in my mind are pretty similar to a social network. And since WhatsApp is a chat app, how about all the other chat apps I am using? iMessage, Slack, Teams. Does this action has any merit or is it just the usual political posturing and games?

Maybe it's to do with social network advertising? (https://marketingland.com/almost-70-of-digital-ad-spending-g...)

I have no knowledge in this area, so just throwing it out there for more informed minds to fill in the blanks.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#129

Post by akarma »

city17 wrote: post #111

I think the key is not whether they'll have to divest current platforms, but if they can acquire whatever will be the next popular platform. If Zuckerberg sells Instagram, but can still buy the next platform, he'll always maintain his monopoly.

> The FTC is seeking a permanent injunction in federal court that could, among other things: require divestitures of assets, including Instagram and WhatsApp; prohibit Facebook from imposing anticompetitive conditions on software developers; and require Facebook to seek prior notice and approval for future mergers and acquisitions.

If the FTC has their way, Facebook will need to seek prior notice and approval for future mergers and acquisitions.

Post reply on HN