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.
- At State of the Net Event, Government Officials Stress Importance of 5G Win for Democracy
- FCC Approves Radio Frequency Traffic Cops, Including Google and Sony, Bringing Commerce to 3.5 GHz Spectrum
- Broadband Roundup: Britain and Huawei, EPIC Fights Against Facial Recognition, E-Rate Fiber
- Panelists Debate Federal Role in Digital Privacy, But Agree Upon Need to Minimize Algorithmic Bias
- FCC ‘Coloring Outside the Lines’ on Broadband Mapping, Say Critics at Next Century Cities Event
Signup for Broadband Breakfast
Broadband Data8 months ago
Pennsylvania Broadband Speeds Worse Than Previously Believed, According to State Report
Broadband Data7 months ago
California Report: Income Most Significant Factor in Low Broadband Adoption
Intellectual Property6 months ago
In Congressional Oversight Hearing, Register of Copyrights Says Office Is Responding to Online Users
Privacy and Security5 months ago
Comparing Privacy Policies for Wearable Fitness Trackers: Apple, Fitbit, Xiaomi and Under Armour
FCC10 years ago
Telecom Companies Are Using Fight Interrupting Oscar Ceremony Broadcast To Manipulate Public and FCC, Argue Broadcasters
Antitrust5 months ago
Addressing the Impact of Big Data Upon Antitrust is More Complicated Than a Big Tech Breakup
Expert Opinion6 months ago
Geoff Mulligan: A ‘Dumb’ Way to Build Smart Cities
Broadband's Impact10 years ago
Make No Mistake: Internet Content Subscription Models will come!