Federal Judge Dismisses Government's Antitrust Suit Against Facebook

[candycorn]

Judge dismisses gov't antitrust lawsuits against Facebook

A federal judge has dismissed antitrust lawsuits brought against Facebook by the Federal Trade Commission and a coalition of state attorneys general, dealing a significant blow to attempts by regulators to rein in tech giants.

apnews.com

From the source:

"The U.S. government and 48 states and districts sued Facebook in December 2020, accusing the tech giant of abusing its market power in social networking to crush smaller competitors and seeking remedies that could include a forced spinoff of the social network’s Instagram and WhatsApp messaging services."

It continues:

"Last October the Trump Justice Department, joined by about a dozen states, brought a landmark antitrust suit against Google, accusing the company of using its dominance in online search to stifle competition and innovation at the expense of consumers. As it stands, the case isn’t scheduled to go to trial in federal court for nearly three years."

It looks as though that suit isn't going anywhere either.

As someone who likes to have multiple choices...its sort of ambivalent in terms of the outcome being a "win" or "loss". What should dawn on the Zuck is to run a less predatory shop. I doubt 48 states and the Feds had "no beef" with the way FB was doing things. Leave a little on the table...

 

[theHawk]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

 

[shockedcanadian]

So what if state by state they decide to ban, limit or fine Facebook? What would this lead to?

You guys are the United States for a reason, and I get the feeling places like Texas and Florida are not happy with the silencing by social media and the power they wield which can actually impact election outcomes.

 

[Dana7360]

Judge dismisses gov't antitrust lawsuits against Facebook

A federal judge has dismissed antitrust lawsuits brought against Facebook by the Federal Trade Commission and a coalition of state attorneys general, dealing a significant blow to attempts by regulators to rein in tech giants.

apnews.com

From the source:

"The U.S. government and 48 states and districts sued Facebook in December 2020, accusing the tech giant of abusing its market power in social networking to crush smaller competitors and seeking remedies that could include a forced spinoff of the social network’s Instagram and WhatsApp messaging services."

It continues:

"Last October the Trump Justice Department, joined by about a dozen states, brought a landmark antitrust suit against Google, accusing the company of using its dominance in online search to stifle competition and innovation at the expense of consumers. As it stands, the case isn’t scheduled to go to trial in federal court for nearly three years."

It looks as though that suit isn't going anywhere either.

As someone who likes to have multiple choices...its sort of ambivalent in terms of the outcome being a "win" or "loss". What should dawn on the Zuck is to run a less predatory shop. I doubt 48 states and the Feds had "no beef" with the way FB was doing things. Leave a little on the table...

That is too bad.

Leave it up to a republican to side with big business.

I hope it's appealed.

 

[Dana7360]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

The judge who dismissed it was appointed by trump.

The current president has nothing to do with that judge or him being on the bench.

You might want to try reading the accompanying article once in a while.

 

[candycorn]

Judge dismisses gov't antitrust lawsuits against Facebook

A federal judge has dismissed antitrust lawsuits brought against Facebook by the Federal Trade Commission and a coalition of state attorneys general, dealing a significant blow to attempts by regulators to rein in tech giants.

apnews.com

From the source:

"The U.S. government and 48 states and districts sued Facebook in December 2020, accusing the tech giant of abusing its market power in social networking to crush smaller competitors and seeking remedies that could include a forced spinoff of the social network’s Instagram and WhatsApp messaging services."

It continues:

"Last October the Trump Justice Department, joined by about a dozen states, brought a landmark antitrust suit against Google, accusing the company of using its dominance in online search to stifle competition and innovation at the expense of consumers. As it stands, the case isn’t scheduled to go to trial in federal court for nearly three years."

It looks as though that suit isn't going anywhere either.

As someone who likes to have multiple choices...its sort of ambivalent in terms of the outcome being a "win" or "loss". What should dawn on the Zuck is to run a less predatory shop. I doubt 48 states and the Feds had "no beef" with the way FB was doing things. Leave a little on the table...

That is too bad.

Leave it up to a republican to side with big business.

I hope it's appealed.

I'm conflicted about it.

On one hand, if you don't like FB...just stay off of it. On the other hand...the company is run in a way that lurches from sanctimony to almost complete aloofness.

At the end of the day, I don't think the mass of your footprint in the social media space should be held against you. Standard Oil...yes. AT&T...yes. The candy aisle of social media? Not so sure.

 

[candycorn]

So what if state by state they decide to ban, limit or fine Facebook? What would this lead to?

You guys are the United States for a reason, and I get the feeling places like Texas and Florida are not happy with the silencing by social media and the power they wield which can actually impact election outcomes.

I don't know enough about how the Internet works to say really but if the server you log onto from Austin, TX is in Toronto...Texas can pass all of the laws it wants to and wouldn't be able to stop you...right?

 

[theHawk]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

The judge who dismissed it was appointed by trump.

The current president has nothing to do with that judge or him being on the bench.

You might want to try reading the accompanying article once in a while.

What does it matter who appointed him? He made the decision based on the law, laws written by politicians bought and paid for by corporate America. So like I said, nothing will happen to FB because they are protected by the elites in Washington.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So what if state by state they decide to ban, limit or fine Facebook? What would this lead to?

Multiple violations of the First Amendment right to freedom of the press and freedom of association, court challenges based on those violations, and an uncertain outcome should those cases come before the Supreme Court.

 

[dblack]

The main thing is, we need a strong authority to tell us what is really true. That's something only the government can do.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

The judge who dismissed it was appointed by trump.

The current president has nothing to do with that judge or him being on the bench.

You might want to try reading the accompanying article once in a while.

What does it matter who appointed him? He made the decision based on the law, laws written by politicians bought and paid for by corporate America. So like I said, nothing will happen to FB because they are protected by the elites in Washington.

The only reason why you and other dishonest, authoritarian conservatives support such lawsuits is because you have unwarranted contempt for social media, FB in particular – incorrectly perceived by rightists as being ‘hostile’ toward conservatives, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘Rebecca Allensworth, a law professor at Vanderbilt University who specializes in antitrust, said the ruling “illustrates the problems regulators face right now bringing antitrust suits in markets without prices, like Facebook’s, but also Google’s, and in markets where huge, dominant firms offer suites of products that don’t neatly fit into the mold of well-defined markets like aluminum ingot or crude oil.”’ ibid

Exactly.

FB is not like an oil company buying up all the oil wells, eliminating all the competition, and having absolute control of ‘the market’ – whatever ‘the market’ is on an infinite internet with unlimited avenues of communication.

 

[theHawk]

incorrectly perceived by rightists as being ‘hostile’ toward conservatives, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth

LOL, thanks for showing how delusional you are.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘New York Attorney General Letitia James said when filing the suit that Facebook “used its monopoly power to crush smaller rivals and snuff out competition, all at the expense of everyday users.”’ ibid

Democrats supporting such a lawsuit is at least consistent – wrong, but consistent.

For conservatives it’s inconsistent, another example of the right’s hypocrisy, supposed ‘advocates’ of free markets and ‘opponents’ of government regulation.

 

[candycorn]

‘Rebecca Allensworth, a law professor at Vanderbilt University who specializes in antitrust, said the ruling “illustrates the problems regulators face right now bringing antitrust suits in markets without prices, like Facebook’s, but also Google’s, and in markets where huge, dominant firms offer suites of products that don’t neatly fit into the mold of well-defined markets like aluminum ingot or crude oil.”’ ibid

Exactly.

FB is not like an oil company buying up all the oil wells, eliminating all the competition, and having absolute control of ‘the market’ – whatever ‘the market’ is on an infinite internet with unlimited avenues of communication.

You make a good point.

 

[Dana7360]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

The judge who dismissed it was appointed by trump.

The current president has nothing to do with that judge or him being on the bench.

You might want to try reading the accompanying article once in a while.

What does it matter who appointed him? He made the decision based on the law, laws written by politicians bought and paid for by corporate America. So like I said, nothing will happen to FB because they are protected by the elites in Washington.

The post you wrote said Facebook bought and paid for the current regime.

I pointed out that the current regime has nothing to do with the judge who dismissed the case and has nothing to do with any of this.

So what do you do?

You lie.

How sad and pathetic.

Not everything you don't like is because of a democrat or the current president.

You made a fool of yourself. Now you're just making it worse.

 

[Correll]

‘New York Attorney General Letitia James said when filing the suit that Facebook “used its monopoly power to crush smaller rivals and snuff out competition, all at the expense of everyday users.”’ ibid

Democrats supporting such a lawsuit is at least consistent – wrong, but consistent.

For conservatives it’s inconsistent, another example of the right’s hypocrisy, supposed ‘advocates’ of free markets and ‘opponents’ of government regulation.

We are opponents of over regulation. You are a fool.

 

[evenflow1969]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

Lol, ya Facebook started under Biden hillarious.

 

[my2¢]

Judge's ruling makes sense to me. Haven't heard anything how Facebook has blocked competition by preventing other social media sites. Pretty much it has been exactly the opposite. "Old folks wrecked Facebook," was the complaint I first heard years ago as the younger generation migrated to other sites because Facebook became too popular with parents.

 

[theHawk]

Facebook bought and paid for the current regime, our government will do nothing to break up their monopoly.

The judge who dismissed it was appointed by trump.

The current president has nothing to do with that judge or him being on the bench.

You might want to try reading the accompanying article once in a while.

What does it matter who appointed him? He made the decision based on the law, laws written by politicians bought and paid for by corporate America. So like I said, nothing will happen to FB because they are protected by the elites in Washington.

The post you wrote said Facebook bought and paid for the current regime.

I pointed out that the current regime has nothing to do with the judge who dismissed the case and has nothing to do with any of this.

So what do you do?

You lie.

How sad and pathetic.

Not everything you don't like is because of a democrat or the current president.

You made a fool of yourself. Now you're just making it worse.

The current regime is the Washington Establishment. They installed Creepy Quid Pro Joe because he won’t ever tell them no. FB and all social media and MSM do as the Washington Establishment dictates, and in return are protected.