Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
1–10 of 17 posts
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#2> Regulators correctly allowed these deals to move forward because they did not threaten competition.
FB at that time said they could impossibly integrate those platforms into FB. An important reason for the Eu to eventually allow the take over. Surprise, surprise, a few years later they announced the platforms are being merged into one.
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#3> The FTC and states stood by for years while Facebook invested billions of dollars and millions of hours to make Instagram and WhatsApp into the apps that users enjoy today.
WhatsApp was very popular with users before acquisition. I'm pretty sure that's why FB bought it. Same with Instagram.
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#4> Both of these acquisitions were reviewed by relevant antitrust regulators at the time. The FTC conducted an in-depth “Second Request” of the Instagram transaction in 2012 before voting unanimously to clear it. The European Commission reviewed the WhatsApp transaction in 2014 and found no risk of harm to competition in any potential market.
Just because they were reviewed to be legal at the time does not mean they're legal now, also it does not mean they were right back then. I believe the FTC isn't subject to the rules against double jeopardy like the legal system.
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#5> Now, many years later, with seemingly no regard for settled law or the consequences to innovation and investment, the agency is saying it got it wrong and wants a do-over.
Nice framing, but the FTC's rulings aren't "law", they're regulatory decisions, and they can be revisited any time they want.
In fact, it would be downright silly for that not to be the case, as it would suggest that the government cannot go back and revisit past decisions in order to intervene and address newly identified market failures that are a product of unanticipated changes in the market.
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#6> The FTC and states stood by for years while Facebook invested billions of dollars and millions of hours to make Instagram and WhatsApp into the apps that users enjoy today. WhatsApp was very popular with users before acquisition. I'm pretty sure that's why FB bought it. Same with Instagram.
WhatsApp was popular, but iirc didn’t have video calls or group phone calls (and perhaps not even 1-1 calls). It is likely true that FB funded WhatsApp’s continuing relevance.
It is just as likely , though, that WhatsApp would develop these features regardless - at perhaps a slightly slower pace.
WhatsApp’s expenses were compatible with $1/user/year they were charging in some markets (and which they would likely be able to charge in most of all).
If FB didn’t fund it , someone else - perhaps the users - would have. But it was the growth (evidence for which was collected through Onavo) and implied threat that made FB buy them, not anything else.
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#7> Both of these acquisitions were reviewed by relevant antitrust regulators at the time. The FTC conducted an in-depth “Second Request” of the Instagram transaction in 2012 before voting unanimously to clear it. The European Commission reviewed the WhatsApp transaction in 2014 and found no risk of harm to competition in any potential market. Just because they were reviewed to be legal at the time does not mean they'r…
Iirc they were found to use WhatsApp contact graph to enhance FB metadata despite promising the EU they wouldn’t.
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#8This is what is known as "drinking the kool-aid".
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#9One of the issues I have with this is that no one seems to know the desired outcome. Facebook touch on that with their critism of the approval/reversal of the mergers. What is the desired outcome here? Is it just divesting from WhatsApp and Insta? That doesn't answer 99% of the criticisms of social media or big tech.
To me, this stinks of "something must be done and this is something".
Re: Lawsuits Filed by FTC and the State Attorneys General Are Revisionist History
#10> Regulators correctly allowed these deals to move forward because they did not threaten competition. FB at that time said they could impossibly integrate those platforms into FB. An important reason for the Eu to eventually allow the take over. Surprise, surprise, a few years later they announced the platforms are being merged into one.
WhatsApp hasn't been merged into FB as far as I can tell? Am I missing the point some technical point, sorry if so.