"Simons said that 'at a high level,' big is not necessarily either good or bad.
He said oftentimes a company's success is because they offer a good service at
a low price, and the government shouldn't mess with that. But, he said, if a
company is using anticompetitive means to get big or stay big, 'then we should
be vigorously enforcing the antitrust laws and prohibiting that conduct.' He
did not say what category he thought either Google or Facebook fell into."
Which is in the FTC's charter, and quite irrelevant to the issue of mandated
telecom neutrality. One would be hard pressed to demonstrate that lack of
telecom competition exists because of unfair anti-competitive practices, on the
part of telecom companies. More like, unwillingness to invest big money where
returns are small. The government cannot fault companies for that!
"Ranking member Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) used the hearing to put in a plug for
net neutrality, or more to the point, a knock on the FCC's deeding of net
neutrality oversight primarily to the FTC when it reclassified broadband access
as a Title I information service in the Dec. 14 Restoring Internet Freedom
Order.
"Simply put, the FTC is not the agency for net neutrality," he said, adding
that despite the amazing things the FTC does, it "does not have the expertise,
resources or authority to adopt forward-looking rules to protect broadband
consumers."
And it's not just a matter of "expertise." It's a matter of not having any
leverage. The FTC is only worrying about anti-trust and about the companies
disclosing their service policies. No one is telling the FTC to enforce
neutrality of the telecoms. So, they are talking about entirely different
things, and the FCC Chairman has been using this FTC business as just another
one of his "distracting attention" tactics. Same as he does with broadcast
"localism," same as he does with his whining about web sites, same as he does
with closing the digital divide. It's all empty rhetoric, to put people to
sleep, while he does exactly the opposite of his oily narrative.
"Thune added a 'here, here' to that call for bipartisan solution, saying,
'Hopefully, we will be able to get there in due time.'"
A reasonable Republican voice? Wow. Let's hope. (But by the way, that's "hear,
hear." It comes for the UK Parliament. It means, "listen up, I agree.")
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6690/hear-hear-or-here-here
Bert
------------------------------------------------
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/ftc-could-cast-antitrust-gaze-big-tech/171799
Washington
Feb 14, 2018 12:55 PM ET
FTC Could Cast Antitrust Gaze on Big Tech
Majority of nominees signal willingness to take new look at edge provider
market power
By John Eggerton
A majority of the nominees for FTC commissioner told a Senate Commerce
Committee panel Wednesday (Feb. 14) that they are willing to take a new look at
Big Tech firms like Google and Facebook, and regulate them if necessary.
That came at a Senate Commerce Committee nomination hearing on President Donald
Trump's four nominees for the Federal Trade Commission: Joseph Simons
(Republican chair), Rohit Chopra (Democrat), Noah Joshua Phillips (Republican)
and Christine S. Wilson (Republican)
Committee chair Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said he hoped to move the nominations
quickly to the floor for a vote, and scheduled a vote for the committee's next
markup.
The FTC has been at only two commissioners (there are supposed to be five) for
many months. Getting the nods were.
Thune asked the nominees about antitrust enforcement and calls for more
regulatory oversight of "Big Tech" firms like Facebook and Google.
Those firms have been increasingly under scrutiny on the Hill and elsewhere
both for their size and their business practices, driven in part by the
scrutiny of social media in the wake of the Russian election meddling, fake
news, and ongoing concerns about online sex trafficking.
Simons said that "at a high level," big is not necessarily either good or bad.
He said oftentimes a company's success is because they offer a good service at
a low price, and the government shouldn't mess with that. But, he said, if a
company is using anticompetitive means to get big or stay big, "then we should
be vigorously enforcing the antitrust laws and prohibiting that conduct." He
did not say what category he thought either Google or Facebook fell into.
Wilson said she understood there had been investigations into companies in the
past--Google, for one, has come under FTC scrutiny for its search practices.
She said given the "elapse of time" since those and the changes in technology,
"it may make sense to take another look at concerns that have been raised." She
said there is no company beyond the reach of the law and that she would support
Chairman Simons in looking into potentially unlawful conduct, "and following
the facts where they lead."
Phillips called it "the big question." He said he experiences daily the
"incredible impact" those companies have on his life and of others, including
his children. He said the FCC has a "big role" in applying the law carefully
and fairly, and keeping up with trends. He said he would help keep the agency
abreast of those developments and, if there are violations of the law, no
matter who was committing them, the FTC would enforce it.
Chopra did not appear ready to put the hammer down on Big Tech. He said that
unlike most sectors, large tech companies are competing with several other
verticals, healthcare, retail, and other sectors. Chopra said it has been a
challenge to predict how market dynamics occur and that the FTC needed to
engage in constant learning. He also said that it was an area to be humble" and
continue to "learn the dynamics."
Ranking member Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) used the hearing to put in a plug for
net neutrality, or more to the point, a knock on the FCC's deeding of net
neutrality oversight primarily to the FTC when it reclassified broadband access
as a Title I information service in the Dec. 14 Restoring Internet Freedom
Order.
"Simply put, the FTC is not the agency for net neutrality," he said, adding
that despite the amazing things the FTC does, it "does not have the expertise,
resources or authority to adopt forward-looking rules to protect broadband
consumers."
Nelson said to look out for a Senate vote on the Congressional Review Act
resolution to nullify that Restoring Internet Freedom order and return the
Title II-based rules. He said his support for the CRA is not inconsistent with
his belief that there needs to be a bipartisan legislative long-term solution
with real protections.
Thune added a "here, here" to that call for bipartisan solution, saying,
"Hopefully, we will be able to get there in due time."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the biggest backers of the net neutrality
rules the Ajit Pai FCC rolled back, also talked about the lack of FTC expertise
on keeping networks open.
Chopra, a Democrat, said he shared many of Markey's concerns, and those of
sitting FTC Democratic Commissioner Terrell McSweeny about overseeing the
internet. For one, he cited an ongoing challenge by the FTC in the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals of a lower court ruling raising the possibility that
some players could be exempt from FTC internet oversight, while others are not.
Following up on that, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) asked all the
commissioners to continue to push the appeal of the court decision that a
business owned by a common carrier, say Yahoo! owned by Verizon, would share
that common carrier's exemption from FTC oversight, creating an enforcement gap
over online privacy.
Simons said he fully expected the Ninth Circuit to overturn that ruling and
said it would be a "great idea" to get rid of the common carrier exemption
altogether. The other nominees nodded their agreement.Simons said the FTC, if
it gets back its authority in the internet space--the FCC rule rollback has not
taken effect yet, and is eyeing challenged in court--it will be a vigorous
enforcer. He said he did not what types of uncompetitive, unfair or deceptive
practices would come up in terms of internet conduct, but if it did the FTC
could reach it under statute, and if something came up that it could not reach,
he would come talk to the committee.
Markey said the FTC lacked rulemaking authority to block blocking, throttling
or paid prioritization, while the FCC had it. Simons said they both had
rulemaking authority, just different types. Markey pressed him on the point,
but Simons said he would want to talk to the General Counsel's office before
saying it did not have rulemaking authority in those areas. "I'm not entirely
clear."
Simons tried to elaborate, but Markey cut him off to move to marketing to
children, another of his signature issues. Each commissioner committed to "an
active, pro-child, privacy protection policy." Markey said it was time to hold
companies accountable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.