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

Calling for Antitrust Reform

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 212 posts

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#121

Post by bombcar »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #92
kevingadd wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the world need another Chromium reskin? What's the point of a Firefox that's just Chrome? How is it competing to slap your brand on top of a competitor's product like you're reselling wholesale electronics from an overseas manufacturer? Look at Edge's market share and explain to me how Mozilla is going to deliver a better Chrome reskin than Microsoft with a tiny fraction of the budget.

The point is that Google does not prevent them from competing. They (Mozilla) are the ones proverbially shooting themselves in the foot. Mozilla to me seems like a cult of grifters in denial with ADD that never even attempt to focus on improving their browser (especially on Linux) and instead would rather build iPhone password managers and act like they aren't enabling a lot of anti-privacy telemetry and data collect…

Mozilla is effectively the arm of Google that Google points to to argue they’re not a monopoly. It’s silly - I’ve heard more about Mozilla doing these performative stunts than I have about the actually trying to build a better browser.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#122

Post by judge2020 »

tomComb wrote: post #105
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mike's own website: https://copia.is/ (scroll down to sponsorship logos) Copia has also been listed on Google's own public policy transparency website in the past, though it's absent at the moment. EDIT: This version of the disclosure is still up: https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/trade_association_... Note that the Google Public Policy Team's explicit purpose is to influence laws to be favorable to the compa…

Interesting, and good to know. The part I don’t get is that Google is listed right next to Yelp, who are the #1 advocates for regulatory action against Google.

That's because Yelp can only extort businesses if Google puts them at the top of search results, instead of providing a quick link to unbiased reviews on Google Maps.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#123

Post by stale2002 »

joecool1029 wrote: post #15
j-bos wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything that lends weight to the message. Like an ant calling out the elephant.

You can rationalize it that way, I get it. However, last I checked Mozilla has a lawyer as their CEO. Why do you think they haven't tested this idea in court if the message is so good?

Did you read the blog post at all? It answers this question.

The answer is that they are trying to change the law.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#124

Post by Kranar »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #112
ethbr0 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if the intent is to regulate monopolies. You know what you call a small cap monopoly? Not a monopoly.

Let's say I make a miracle drug for people with a rare disease, patent it, and it costs $0.01 to produce, and I'll watch people die unless they pay me >$1M. Am I a monopoly since I only have a few million in revenue?

Under WTO rules, pharmaceutical patents are subject to compulsory licensing meaning a competitor would be allowed to use your patent whether you like it or not. Yes you would be entitled to a royalty but the rate is unlikely to be as egregious as 1 million dollars per unit.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#125

Post by Teever »

bombcar wrote: post #107
jszymborski wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An oligopoly, then? A cartel?

These anti-monopoly laws always end up as “make restrictions preventing new competitors at some cost the big companies can easily handle”.

Always? All anti-monopoly laws, ever?

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#126

Post by stale2002 »

Animats wrote: post #2

That's not "antitrust reform". It's so narrowly drawn that it affects only maybe Facebook, Google, and Twitter. Read the definition of "covered platform". Arguably it's a bill of attainder.

> That's not "antitrust reform". It's so narrowly drawn

Almost by definition, anti-trust law is only going to narrowly effect a few companies.

If a company isn't huge already, then the whole motivation for applying anti-trust law goes away.

The whole point of anti-trust law is to narrowly target only a few of the very worst offenders in a market.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#127

Post by doitLP »

leotravis10 wrote: post #41
throwaway_1928 wrote: post #28

John Oliver also covered tech monopolies recently. Tech Monopolies: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXf04bhcjbg

Here's Mike Masnick's response over on Techdirt on that. A big swing and a miss which is rare on Oliver's part: https://www.techdirt.com/2022/06/14/john-olivers-big-whiff-j...

I disagree. He has covered three big topics in his jokey rants which I happened to know intimately and he’s gotten them horribly wrong all three times. Like embarrassingly wrong. To pretend all the rest are hard-hitting and well-researched would be some hardcore Gell-Mann amnesia.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#128

Post by HWR_14 »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #94
EarlKing wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worse than you think. The definition of a Covered Platform is so overbroad that basically if you allow any kind of user interaction on your website (or OPERATING SYSTEM!) then yours is a covered platform. So imagine you run a restaurant and allow for a customer feedback form that is visible on the website... congratulations, you've now become a covered platform and are obliged to allow other people to sell produ…

Doesn't the bill text also have thresholds that need to be met (such as revenue, user quantity, etc) for you to be subject to enforcement?

Yes. The thresholds are insanely high - like 1 in 8 people use it. Literally. 50 million US MAU or 1 billion worldwide (a smaller threshold of 100k business customers). And a market cap of 550 billion dollars (which automatically adjusts with inflation).

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#129

Post by stale2002 »

huitzitziltzin wrote: post #16
superb-owl wrote: post #3

The vertical monopolies enjoyed by tech behemoths are absurd. Ever since the Internet Explorer antitrust case [1] it should be clear that things like Apple disallowing other browsers in iOS or Google promoting its own sites in search results are illegal and anticompetitive. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... .

I teach antitrust to grads and undergrads. It doesn’t do anyone any good to call any of these firms “monopolies.” It’s not accurate, not for any of them. Nor was monopoly the issue in the Microsoft case (that was about bundling). There may be reasons to look at antitrust law and to change it with some of these firms and their behaviors in mind but “vertical monopoly” isn’t an accurate characterization of any of them.

> I teach antitrust to grads and undergrads.

If you teach economics class on these subjects, then you must be familiar with the terms "horizontal integration" and "vertical integration".

Lets say 1 company has "horizontally integrated" the entire market along that horizonal. What would you call that?

Now do the same thing for "vertical integration".

Once you have thought about both of these questions, you will know why people are using the term "vertical monopoly".

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#130

Post by HWR_14 »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #112
ethbr0 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if the intent is to regulate monopolies. You know what you call a small cap monopoly? Not a monopoly.

Let's say I make a miracle drug for people with a rare disease, patent it, and it costs $0.01 to produce, and I'll watch people die unless they pay me >$1M. Am I a monopoly since I only have a few million in revenue?

If you create such a miracle drug why on earth would we want a policy that lets people die?
Post reply on HN