Gig companies seek to sway pro-union task force
Presented by CTIA
With help from John Hendel and Leah Nylen
Editor’s Note: Morning Tech is a free version of POLITICO Pro Technology s morning newsletter, which is delivered to our subscribers each morning at 6 a.m. The POLITICO Pro platform combines the news you need with tools you can use to take action on the day’s biggest stories. Organizing labor:
Gig companies are trying to figure out a way to influence President Joe Biden’s new pro-union task force. Egging on Elon:
A coalition is forming to lobby against Elon Musk’s SpaceX in an FCC fight over airwaves.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Sen. Hawley s Trust-Busting for the Twenty-First Century Act, introduced on April 12, 2021, takes aim at Big Tech, Big Banks, Big Telecom, and Big Pharma
1 by proposing to curb mergers and acquisitions by large corporations and ease the way for prosecutors and private plaintiffs to prevail in antitrust litigation. Sen. Hawley s bill is the latest proposal for antitrust reform, following Democrat-led efforts such as the House Judiciary staff recommendations in October 2020 and Sen. Klobuchar s antitrust reform bill introduced in February 2021.
On April 12, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced the Trust-Busting for the Twenty-First Century Act, proposing to substantially rewrite the US antitrust laws along the lines proposed by prominent Democrats, including Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and FTC Commissioner nominee Lina Khan. Sen. Hawley s plan would prohibit so-called mega corporations those with a market-cap excee
Pretty much all that Apple can try to accuse Epic of is having planned its Project Liberty since 2019 and having given one of its outside counsel an Epic email address. By contrast, Epic s filing contains so many revelations that I haven t even found the time yet to blog about all of them (I plan to discuss some of them in May in connection with trial testimony), and even my numerous tweets just provided examples of all that s wrong with the App Store, but top-notch media discovered a lot in Epic s filing and reported on it. There s a whole parade of horribles from Apple deciding not to publish an Android version of its iMessage app because it wants to lock users into its platform to an internal admission that the App Store review s contribution to security is like bringing a plastic butter knife to a gunfight. In fact, it has now been confirmed that the App Store monopoly was justa policy decision and Apple s security experts weren t even involved in the internal discussions. Pr
Pretty much all that Apple can try to accuse Epic of is having planned its Project Liberty since 2019 and having given one of its outside counsel an Epic email address. By contrast, Epic s filing contains so many revelations that I haven t even found the time yet to blog about all of them (I plan to discuss some of them in May in connection with trial testimony), and even my numerous tweets just provided examples of all that s wrong with the App Store, but top-notch media discovered a lot in Epic s filing and reported on it. There s a whole parade of horribles from Apple deciding not to publish an Android version of its iMessage app because it wants to lock users into its platform to an internal admission that the App Store review s contribution to security is like bringing a plastic butter knife to a gunfight. In fact, it has now been confirmed that the App Store monopoly was justa policy decision and Apple s security experts weren t even involved in the internal discussions. Pr
Apr.07.2021
On March 18, the House Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law held its third investigative hearing this year, entitled, “Reviving Competition, Part 3: Strengthening the Laws to Address Monopoly Power.” The hearing underscored increasing calls from some lawmakers, law enforcers, and judges to rethink the nation’s recent approach to competition law and policy in favor of more extensive government intervention.
The hearing follows two prior hearings, the first on February 25, concerning the effect of barriers to entry and the conduct of “gatekeepers” on tech industry competition, and the second on March 12, addressing dominant firms’ effect on journalism and the free press. These hearings follow a 16-month bi-partisan investigation into the state of competition in digital markets, including whether dominant firms engaged in anticompetitive conduct and whether legislative reforms are necessary to address these issues. That investigation cu