Pluralistic: Mark Zuckerberg personally lost the Facebook antitrust case (18 Apr 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
pluralistic.net

It’s damned hard to prove an antitrust case: so often, the prosecution has to prove that the company intended to crush competition, and/or that they raised prices or reduced quality because they knew they didn’t have to fear competitors.

It’s a lot easier to prove what a corporation did than it is to prove why they did it. What am I, a mind-reader? But imagine for a second that the corporation in the dock is a global multinational. Now, imagine that the majority of the voting shares in that company are held by one man, who has served as the company’s CEO since the day he founded it, personally calling every important shot in the company’s history.

Now imagine that this founder/CEO, this accused monopolist, was an incorrigible blabbermouth, who communicated with his underlings almost exclusively in writing, and thus did he commit to immortal digital storage a stream – a torrent – of memos in which he explicitly confessed his guilt.

Ladies and gentlepersons, I give you Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Meta (nee Facebook), an accused monopolist who cannot keep his big dumb fucking mouth shut.

  • djsp@feddit.orgEnglish
    3·
    1 day ago

    I can’t even believe the trump admin is going after tech giants.

    I share the disbelief. I think it is mostly a power play against not just Google, but all tech giants, which must be watching this closely, given most of them operate in a similarly anticompetitive manner: kiss the ring or else. The Trump administration could give Google reprieve in exchange for axing DEI further and helping push their political agenda.

    I can’t imagine anything the admin does will be good for society so maybe its safe to assume they will be broken up so elon can buy a chunk?

    I think so too: if Google doesn’t satisfy Trump and his administration, parts of it will be forcibly sold as private equity, outside of shareholder scrutiny and beyond the reach of the SEC. Such a private company would be easier to control than a publicly traded one.

    • TronBronson@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      24 hours ago

      Yea i guess the most simple explanation, that is most coherent with the rest of the administration’s actions, is that it’s just a mob style shake down of every major economic player. Pure extortion as the japanese said.

      But ya its funny to see the SEC and DOJ neutered and then actually used against big tech. Ironic and poetic, and fucking stupid. It really burns at the senses, and creates confusion.