A review of the potential antitrust cases against Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon suggests that only Google is vulnerable.
Why a better name for Apple’s Audacity was “The First Post-iPhone Keynote”; then, why a broad focus on tech by antitrust authorities is good for Google, and the implications of the Supreme Court getting *Pepper* wrong.
Google is potentially facing antitrust action in the U.S., and both Democrats and Republicans appear to be on board. Then, why antitrust action, even if justified, is usually an indicator of decline, not a cause.
Huawei loses its partnership with ARM, then why the question of values was a criticism of the U.S. too (and Facebook’s arguments against regulation). Plus, the FTC wins against Qualcomm
More on Apple-Qualcomm, then Sony releases details about their next-generation console, and Jeff Bezos’ annual letter to shareholders has a decidedly different tone.
Apple settled its lawsuit with Qualcomm, while Intel exited cellular modems: how are these event connected? Then, why Apple miscalculated in its decision to sue Qualcomm.
A federal judge rules against Qualcomm in a clear victory for Apple, just another area where Qualcomm is struggling. Then, why is Netflix allowing itself to be commoditized, at least a bit, by MVPDs?
Thoughts and notes from the FTC discussion on digital platform and competition, plus how Google’s remedy in Europe will mean more of the same when it comes to Android.
Understanding the differences between aggregators and platforms matters for companies interacting with them and also regulators considering antitrust.
Any regulation, including those around net neutrality, should be put to a cost-benefit analysis. In this case regulation advocates come up short.