House finds Google, Apple wield ‘monopoly power’ that demands changes
A housing court has found that Google, Apple, Amazon and Facebook all have “monopoly power”. The committee recommends “structural separation” to prevent companies from favoring their services. It is not clear whether these changes will occur. While the Big Tech exam in Congress is unlikely to provide meaningful answers, the investigation into that case will […]
- A housing court has found that Google, Apple, Amazon and Facebook all have “monopoly power”.
- The committee recommends “structural separation” to prevent companies from favoring their services.
- It is not clear whether these changes will occur.
While the Big Tech exam in Congress is unlikely to provide meaningful answers, the investigation into that case will yield significant results. The House Judicial Subcommittee on No-Confidence Published Results of a 16-month investigation (via) CNBC) And Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook have all been found to have “monopoly power” and require major changes.
Google has a monopoly on search, which is implemented through “anti-competitive tactics”, including via Android. The company reportedly abused its power to force phone manufacturers to pre-install and set their defaults. According to the sequence it dominates through Chrome, Google Maps and Google Cloud and uses programs like Android Lockbox to monitor the competition.
Related: Android is becoming a monopoly and that can be a problem
Apple, meanwhile, is demanding a monopoly on the app market for iOS devices, discouraging rival apps and charging “super competitive” prices. Amazon’s desired monopoly came from the acquisition of companies, the digging of third-party vendors, and the use of Alexa to select products when collecting user data. The committee alleged that companies such as Instagram and WhatsApp had created a monopoly on Facebook by explicitly acquiring them to suppress competition, while at the same time making it difficult to break free from network influence.
In response, the subcommittee recommended a no-confidence motion. It called for a “structural separation” (not necessarily a bankruptcy) and a ban on leading platform operators from entering “adjacent” businesses. Political physicians wanted to prevent monopolies from preferring their services to others, to provide competitive services, and to enable data exchange to help people move.
Whether or not any of these potential reforms will happen is another matter.
Officials called for a change in the strategy of the no-confidence motion. The merger with the FTC and the Department of Justice’s no-confidence team should be assumed by default, and companies are asked to prove why they are not harming competition. The FTC also has to regularly collect data on power concentrations. The government will also ban restrictions on forced arbitration and class action cases.
Whether or not any of these potential reforms will happen is another matter. Republicans have already opposed the proposed measures in the Democratic-led inquiry. Both the Senate and the President must sail to the House to pass any meaningful constitution. However, this does not prevent some form of repression November 3 election Political landscape can be changed in favor of drastic action.
Google has denied allegations of a monopoly on its use of Android and search policies. Investigators will have to do more to accommodate third-party apps and stores, including those preloaded on non-pixel phones, if they have their way. It’s good to be competitive, though it’s not guaranteed – there are many options, but Google Apps like Play Store and Gmail are still considered a must have for phones in the US.