A tense debate over curbing the power of the biggest companies in high tech broke out at CES 2020 in Las Vegas late Thursday.
Speakers agreed that antitrust laws were not well-suited to handle the challenges posed by high tech, but divided over the merits of sweeping regulation.
As the presidential election looms closer, the argument over the power of large tech companies like Amazon, Facebook, or Google seems to be an ever-present debate – even at the hub of the tech economy, the country’s largest trade show sponsored by the Consumer Technology Association.
Although Public Knowledge Senior Policy Counsel Charlotte Slaiman said she believed big tech companies need to be broken up because they are too powerful and threaten competition, doing so with antitrust laws will take too long and require protracted litigation.
Instead, Slaiman suggested new regulations focused on dominant digital platforms, and which allows smaller businesses to compete more freely.
Because other companies have to use these platforms to have a voice, Slaiman suggested changes that could foster competition: interoperability with other services who want to join the platform, non-discrimination in preference of services, neutral product promotion, and a sector specific merging review.
Other panelists disagreed. Robert Atkinson, CEO of Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, said that big was good.
Competition is a legitimate concern, he said, but argued that breaking up big tech is the wrong approach. Digital platform markets are economies of scale, and because of that, big companies are better.
Atkinson said he had seen only seen minor conduct-based grievances again big tech, and because of that, big tech hasn’t broken any antitrust laws.
Zach Graves, head of policy with Lincoln Network, echoed this argument. Customers are happy with the services and dissenters have punitive intentions, he said. Breaking up big tech is low on the list of concerns for the average person, he said.
When the moderator asked what a break up would look like, no one had an answer. Jennifer Huddleston, research fellow at Mercatus Center, could only guess. She said an attempt to break up one of the big tech giants would trigger decades of judicial review over every action.
- With the Goal of Rural Deployment, FCC Adopts 5G Fund and Revises Rules on Wireless Facilities
- Breakfast Media Minute: October 30, 2020
- Google, Facebook and Twitter Defend Themselves as GOP Slams Big Tech and Dems Mock Hearing
- Panel of Antitrust Experts Assembled by AEI Slams House Judiciary Antitrust Report as ‘Political’
- Kristian Stout: Costs For Pole Attachments Should be Shared by Utilities and New Broadband Entrants
Signup for Broadband Breakfast
Broadband Roundup2 months ago
Nathan Simington is Trump’s New Man for FCC, New Speed Test, Challenges for State Net Neutrality
Broadband's Impact4 months ago
Broadband Breakfast Live Online Launches Weekly Series Featuring ‘Champions of Broadband’
Fiber2 months ago
Ubiquitous Fiber Infrastructure is Essential to Maximize the Advantages of 5G, According to WIA Report
Open Access4 months ago
In Danville, Virginia, an Early Adopter of Open Access Seeks to Prove the Business Model
5G4 months ago
Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg Describes 5G-to-the-Home Vision, Claiming U.S. Leads in 5G Deployment
Innovation2 months ago
Governments and Central Banks Continue to Be Necessary with ‘Stable Coins’ and Cryptocurrencies
Section 2304 months ago
Parler, Gab, and Section 230: Right-Leaning Social Networks Push Alternative to Twitter and Facebook
#broadbandlive1 month ago
Broadband Breakfast Live Online on Wednesday, September 30, 2020 — Champions of Broadband: Sunne McPeak