There are a couple of issues here that seem to crop up every time people try to apply antitrust to these sectors. No one ever seems to address them. It's almost as if people decided they want a shiny new task force and then looked for a justification... Specifically my issues are:
First, that it's not really possible for tech companies to share their data without massive leaks. You can identify most people from their post code and date of birth. So the idea that google can strip names from the database and make it available and that 3ont come back to haunt users is frankly silly. The Cambridge Analytica scandal (imho a much more pressing issue that competition in tech/advertising) proves this. It also shows what happened historically when Facebook tried this.
I don't think it's possible to share datasets at all without basically having a total privacy breach. I don't particularly trust facebook/Google with my data, but I trust them more than "literally anyone who fills in a form and send it in to request access".
The second issue is that these are natural monopolies. That what the press release itself argues. That's what most people think. That's why these tech companies haven't been caught abusing their positions under existing rules: they don't need to, the landscape does it for them.
This is important because the only want to bring competition to a natural monopoly is to change the landscape. Every time that competition obsessed governments have tried to force competition on natural monopolies without that has failed. Here in the UK the examples of this include weird fake "markets" for train operators, water utilities and Internet infrastructure. Maybe UK Gov should finish those great leaps forwards before getting involved in something more complex, faster changing and international?
Again, I think these services should be regulated. I'm just saying regulating a natural monopoly is not the same as trying to force it to not be a natural monopoly...
The third issue is a bit more general. We have a lot of antitrust issues here in the UK. I hear the US is the same. But Facebook isn't on the top 100 for me. Sure, they're a monopoly but unlike other monopolies or oligopolies they don't seem to be abusing their power. So why is everyone desperately interested in them? The CMA should get its shit together and deal with the appauling quality of broadband in the UK (I could list the massive abuses going on there). Or mobile phone networks (some of the lowest rated companies in the country for a reason). Or water or trains.
People may argue Facebook is "essential", maybe it is. But its not as essential or as expensive as my (legally mandated, under regulated, suspiciously profitable) monopoly water supplier.
First, that it's not really possible for tech companies to share their data without massive leaks. You can identify most people from their post code and date of birth. So the idea that google can strip names from the database and make it available and that 3ont come back to haunt users is frankly silly. The Cambridge Analytica scandal (imho a much more pressing issue that competition in tech/advertising) proves this. It also shows what happened historically when Facebook tried this.
I don't think it's possible to share datasets at all without basically having a total privacy breach. I don't particularly trust facebook/Google with my data, but I trust them more than "literally anyone who fills in a form and send it in to request access".
The second issue is that these are natural monopolies. That what the press release itself argues. That's what most people think. That's why these tech companies haven't been caught abusing their positions under existing rules: they don't need to, the landscape does it for them.
This is important because the only want to bring competition to a natural monopoly is to change the landscape. Every time that competition obsessed governments have tried to force competition on natural monopolies without that has failed. Here in the UK the examples of this include weird fake "markets" for train operators, water utilities and Internet infrastructure. Maybe UK Gov should finish those great leaps forwards before getting involved in something more complex, faster changing and international?
Again, I think these services should be regulated. I'm just saying regulating a natural monopoly is not the same as trying to force it to not be a natural monopoly...
The third issue is a bit more general. We have a lot of antitrust issues here in the UK. I hear the US is the same. But Facebook isn't on the top 100 for me. Sure, they're a monopoly but unlike other monopolies or oligopolies they don't seem to be abusing their power. So why is everyone desperately interested in them? The CMA should get its shit together and deal with the appauling quality of broadband in the UK (I could list the massive abuses going on there). Or mobile phone networks (some of the lowest rated companies in the country for a reason). Or water or trains.
People may argue Facebook is "essential", maybe it is. But its not as essential or as expensive as my (legally mandated, under regulated, suspiciously profitable) monopoly water supplier.