The next tech antitrust era is beginning in earnest

House lawmakers are looking to remake competition in tech, as one of the foremost antitrust enforcers is headed to the FTC.

A graphic of a gavel being brought down on a computer mouse

Lawmakers are unveiling a slate of bills to remake antitrust in the tech space and are poised to put in place a reformer at the FTC.

Image: Sinchen.Lin/Marco Verch/Protocol

For years, politicians have demanded for someone, anyone, to do something about antitrust and Big Tech. Now, a whole lot is suddenly poised to begin.

Lawmakers in the House unveiled a dramatic proposed expansion of the antitrust laws on Friday. At the same time, the Senate appears to be gearing up to officially vote on Lina Khan, President Joe Biden's nominee to the Federal Trade Commission, for a post enforcing U.S. antitrust laws. Khan has long pushed for strong antitrust enforcement and reform, particularly when it comes to major tech firms such as Amazon.

The action in both chambers is the culmination of years of dimming views of Big Tech on both sides of the aisle — not only over competition, but also in how companies approach privacy, work with China or affect elections — following a long period when Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google could rely on Washington to view them as the height of benevolent innovation.

House lawmakers released five bills, each bipartisan, that arise from years of allegations that companies such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google blocked rivals, wrung unfair concessions from partners or bought out challengers. The proposals could forever alter the digital economy with measures that strike at the heart of what lawmakers identified in a blockbuster report as anticompetitive or concerning practices by the four companies.

Perhaps the most controversial bill would allow the federal government to seek to force big digital platforms to spin off business lines when "conflicts of interest" exist with its main business, such as when Google features search results from advertisers.

Even before that, though, a bill from the panel's chairman, Rep. David Cicilline, would stop large platforms from giving preference to their own offerings or partners, in an attempt to address concerns that Google boosts its own results over competitors like Yelp or that Amazon makes it harder for third-party sellers who choose not to use its logistics operation to reach consumers. Other provisions would also theoretically touch on complaints about Apple's pre-loading of its own apps.

The CEOs of all four companies testified before the House as part of the investigation that led to the report. All insisted that, far from standing in violation of antitrust laws, they face robust competition and make business decisions only to please users.

Remaking industry

A third bill would all but ban acquisitions by major tech companies unless they could prove "by clear and convincing evidence" that the target isn't a competitive threat to any business line. Giant tech companies have routinely grown by buying up smaller firms, and such deals rarely face much scrutiny. The fourth would require major platforms to allow users to bring their data over to other services and potentially have them message one another. Proponents say the ideas, known as data portability and interoperability, could make it easier for upstart companies to challenge big digital players, especially Facebook.

The final bill would raise the fees that companies pay to register big deals. A companion bill led by Sen. Amy Klobuchar has already passed the Senate. Indeed, recent Senate bills, some from lawmakers with longstanding interest in antitrust and some from Republicans who see competition as a way to punish companies for alleged liberal views, have also signaled that lawmakers were genuine about wanting to put pen to paper in an epoch of revamped antitrust.

The pushback from industry was swift at the consideration of bills that would so drastically remake the competitive rules for Big Tech.

"If passed into law, these bills will result in higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation for Americans," Carl Szabo, vice president of the tech trade group NetChoice, which counts Amazon, Facebook and Google as members, said when reports of the bills emerged. Adam Kovacevich, a former Google official who now runs a left-leaning pro-tech group, said the proposals could result in "banning conveniences like Amazon Basics brand batteries, Apple's Find my Phone tool or Google Maps appearing in Google search results."

Although each bill has a Democratic and Republican co-sponsor, others in the GOP might balk at increasing the ability of government to go after powerful companies. Without Republican support, the bills could stall in the Senate.

Revamping antitrust

When it comes to Khan, who worked as a lawyer during the panel's probe into competition in the tech space and its report, opponents of Big Tech have been practically giddy at the possibility that she would be joining the FTC, which is suing Facebook, investigating Amazon and overall serving as the nation's de facto tech regulator.

Khan made a blockbuster appearance on the antitrust scene while still a law student with her 2017 article on Amazon in the Yale Law Journal. She is now closely identified with the idea that competition enforcers lost sight of their original purpose in the late 1970s and let digital giants grow unchecked. Her views have become representative of the key beliefs of the new era.

"President Biden's choice to nominate Lina Khan demonstrated that Democrats understand the imperative of turning the page on a failed era of antitrust enforcement," said Sarah Miller, executive director of the American Economic Liberties Project, which pushes for antitrust reform and stepped-up enforcement, and a former colleague of Khan's.

Giving Khan a vote on the five-member commission, particularly when it's looking into the very company whose practices she has most criticized, has struck opponents of tech power as the beginning of the end in what they see as the commission's long deference to industry. (Khan especially focused on Amazon's relationship to third-party sellers on its platform, which has been a subject of the probe.) Those backing Khan would like to see tougher litigation strategy, more stringent settlements and expanded use of the agency's limited regulatory powers as part of a long-term project to curb the power of the largest digital platforms.

In many cases, what Khan stands for has bipartisan resonance, and her nomination already cleared the committee that oversees FTC posts with support from both Democrats and some Republicans. It's expected she can at least squeak by the rest of the Democratic Senate in a vote, likely early in the week.

"Lina Khan is, in short, an out-of-the-box thinker, a pioneer in competition policy," Klobuchar said when introducing Khan at her confirmation hearing in April. "Her deep understanding of how markets influence our lives and how the law should function is exactly what we need at the FTC."

In addition to Khan, Biden is due another pick to the agency. He also has yet to make a pick for antitrust chief at the Justice Department. It shares responsibility for antitrust laws with the FTC — and is pursuing a massive case against Google.


Affirm CEO: 'Buy now, pay later' becomes more attractive in a slump

With consumers grappling with rising rates and prices, the question of whether they’ll still buy now and pay later is open. Max Levchin thinks Affirm knows the answer.

Affirm CEO Max Levchin spoke with Protocol about "buy now, pay later."

Photo: John Lamparski/Getty Images

Shortly after Affirm went public last year, CEO Max Levchin told Protocol that he saw “an ocean of opportunities” for the “buy now, pay later” pioneer. Wall Street agreed.

Affirm’s stock soared in its trading debut as the company blazed a trail for a fast-growing alternative to the credit cards that Levchin says consumers are increasingly rejecting.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Businesses are evolving, with current events and competition serving as the catalysts for technology adoption. Events from the pandemic to the ongoing war in Ukraine have exposed the fragility of global supply chains. The topic of sustainability is now on every board room agenda. Industries from manufacturing to retail and everything in between are exploring the latest innovations like process automation, machine learning and AI to identify potential safeguards against future disruption. But according to a recent survey from Boston Consulting Group, while 80% of companies are adopting digital solutions to navigate existing business challenges or opportunities like the ones mentioned, only about 30% successfully digitally transform their business.

For the last 50 years, SAP has worked closely with our customers to solve some of the world’s most intricate problems. We have also seen, and have been a part of, rapid accelerations in technology in response. Across industries, certain paths have emerged to help businesses manage the unexpected challenges over the last few years.

Keep Reading Show less
DJ Paoni

DJ Paoni is the President of SAP North America and is responsible for the strategy, day-to-day operations, and overall customer success in the United States and Canada. Dedicated to helping customers become best-run businesses, DJ has established himself as a trusted advisor who places a high priority on their success. He works with many of SAP North America's 155,000 customers and helps them adopt business and technology best practices across 25 different industries.


The post-layoff playbook: How to avoid 'survivor's guilt'

Taking care of your laid-off employees is important. But how can you restore trust with the employees who make it through?

Employees who survive layoffs are charged with holding the company together. Whether or not managers listen to their concerns can make or break a company’s culture.

Photo: Justin Pumfrey/The Image Bank/Getty Images

Jennifer Burke was on her way to Hawaii for her daughter’s wedding when Zillow followed through on its long-anticipated layoff. She asked her manager to break the news to her by message in the car. You’re one of the safe ones, her manager responded.

“I felt relieved, of course,” Burke said. “I felt apprehensive. I felt sympathy for my co-workers that I knew were going to be laid off.”

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.


Why chip companies need the college students dazzled by software jobs

New chip fabricating plants will need tens of thousands of skilled workers who don’t currently exist. Training them means persuading students to look away from jobs at big tech companies.

Intel employees in clean room "bunny suits" work at Intel's D1X factory in Hillsboro, Oregon.

Photo: Intel Corporation

Every morning, Isaiah Morris drives his white Nissan Altima eight miles down Arizona state Route 101 to a sprawling, low-level office park in South Tempe. Inside one of the unassuming buildings adjacent to GoDaddy’s headquarters and a couple of Amazon offices, the Arizona State University student dons a lab coat, safety shoes and prescription goggles as he helps engineer chemicals for a chip manufacturing process called planarization.

Morris is an unusual 21-year-old. When they graduate college, many of his tech-minded peers will opt to work for the likes of Apple, Google and other household names that have enjoyed meteoric growth over the last decade. Jobs at those tech companies symbolize prestige for graduates and their parents in a way that careers with chipmakers like Intel do not.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email: akramer@protocol.com), where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.


A new UK visa could steal your top tech talent

Without meaningful immigration reform, U.S.-trained foreign graduates could head across the pond.

The U.S. immigration system turns away hundreds of thousands of highly skilled tech workers every year.

Photo: Ben Fathers/AFP via Getty Images

Almost as soon as he took office, President Biden began the work of undoing a lot of the damage the Trump administration did to the U.S. H-1B visa program. He allowed a Trump-era ban on entry by H-1B holders to expire and withdrew a Trump proposal to prohibit H-1B visa holders’ spouses from working in the U.S. More recently, his administration has expanded the number of degrees considered eligible for special STEM OPT visas.

But the U.S. immigration system still turns away hundreds of thousands of highly skilled — and in many cases U.S.-educated — tech workers every year. Now the U.K. is trying to capitalize on the United States’ failure to reform its policy regarding high-skilled immigrants with a new visa that could poach American-trained tech talent across the pond. And there’s good reason to believe it could work.

Keep Reading Show less
Kwasi Gyamfi Asiedu

Kwasi (kway-see) is a fellow at Protocol with an interest in tech policy and climate. Previously, he covered global religion news at the Associated Press in New York. Before that, he was a freelance journalist based out of Accra, Ghana, covering social justice, health, and environment stories. His reporting has been published in The New York Times, Quartz, CNN, The Guardian, and Public Radio International. He can be reached at kasiedu@protocol.com.

Latest Stories