Read on Twitter
. @noahpinion makes a good point here that breakups won’t solve many problems in tech, and that regulation will be needed to fill in the gaps.
I am skeptical that competition between platforms will induce good behavior on things like privacy. But … 1/n https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-17/big-tech-can-stay-big-if-we-get-better-antitrust-rules?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-view&utm_content=view
I am skeptical that competition between platforms will induce good behavior on things like privacy. But … 1/n https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-17/big-tech-can-stay-big-if-we-get-better-antitrust-rules?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-view&utm_content=view
… these are not either/or decisions. Where conduct violates antitrust law, where a breakup would restore competition that was eliminated by said conduct, and where a behavioral remedy won’t suffice, a breakup can be warranted. Like for Facebook 2/n https://promarket.org/2020/12/11/facebook-lawsuit-breakup-divestiture-instagram-whatsap/
Structural solutions can also solve the nagging problem of self-preferencing, albeit in a draconian fashion. You can’t give preference to a (vertical) division that is no longer yours! In defense of the breakup fans, I don’t think they believe that breakups solve everything. 3/n
Now I’d prefer to lean on a nondiscrimination regime here, with the threat of structural solution as a last resort for recidivist discriminators, something akin to what the EU just did. 4/n https://twitter.com/HalSinger/status/1338883852434092033?s=20
We have to leave all the remedies on the table, including structural. Where necessary, use divestiture. Where is doesn’t make sense or where a less invasive remedy solves the problem, use regulation. But don’t unilaterally disarm. U never know when u might need the big stick! FIN
