A Day of Reckoning for Tech Giants? Here's Another View
Hogan Lovells' Logan Breed is among those antitrust lawyers who think the Federal Trade Commission's task force will trouble the technology giants. Also, in another sign the FTC is flexing its regulatory muscles, the trade commission has sent letters to seven big internet service providers demanding information on their data collection and privacy practices.
April 03, 2019 at 03:09 PM
5 minute read
While some antitrust practitioners are skeptical of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's announcement that its Bureau of Competition is convening a task force to monitor competition among the tech giants including Alphabet Inc.'s Google, Facebook and others, as reported last month, that view is hardly universal.
And since then, the FTC also announced it has demanded information from seven big broadband internet service providers last week on their data collection and privacy practice and procedures.
Hogan Lovells' Logan Breed is among the antitrust lawyers who think the FTC task force will be consequential and isn't mere window-dressing in response to political pressure.
Breed, a partner in the firm's Washington, D.C., regulatory group, said the 17-member task force is likely at a minimum to tie up many hours of inside and outside counsels' time and effort with investigations of past deals and future ones, even if the likelihood of the FTC actually going to court to unwind deals like Facebook's 2012 acquisition of Instagram is small. Facebook recently announced plans to integrate WhatsApp, Facebook and Instagram.
“I know the leadership at the agency is committed to making this a substantive working team that is going to be tasked with a broad range of potential issues they could pursue,” Breed said.
Breed attended the American Bar Association's annual spring meeting last week in D.C., where the FTC commissioners and the director of the Bureau of Competition talked about the types of issues that they envision the task force addressing, he said. All of them indicated that they believed it could take on everything from backward-looking reviews of consummated mergers to unilateral conduct investigations involving the acquisition or maintenance of monopoly power to investigations of new mergers.
Breed said that as an indication of what FTC's new leadership thinks this task force could accomplish, they also referred back to FTC's 2002 Merger Litigation Task Force, which in addition to reviewing the agency's approach to litigation, resulted in a legal challenge to a hospital merger.
“I would expect that tech companies will be on notice that their conduct and possibly their past mergers and future mergers will be under more scrutiny because of this task force than they were before,” he said, adding that companies called on the carpet might have to endure multiyear probes.
“It is expensive to defend an FTC investigation,” he said. “It is going to take time, money and attention from other things those companies were going to be doing.” Short of a court challenge, he said, the task force could also make an impact “if the task force would come up with new theories of harm, new ways to apply antitrust laws in the tech industry, or something else that expands the issues the FTC plans to address in the future.”
FTC Broadband Inquiry
Meanwhile, in more evidence of increased regulatory scrutiny, the Federal Trade Commission on March 26 demanded information from seven of the largest broadband internet service providers, or ISPs, including Verizon, AT&T and Comcast about their data collection and privacy practices, including specifically what kind of data about consumers the companies are collecting from their devices, whether it is being shared with third parties and whether they have disclosed to their customers what they are doing. They are also asking about their policies for letting customers examine, correct or delete their personal information.
The orders were sent to: AT&T Inc., AT&T Mobility LLC, Comcast Cable Communications doing business as Xfinity, Google Fiber Inc., T-Mobile US Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., and Cellco Partnership Inc. doing business as Verizon Wireless, according to the FTC.
“The FTC is initiating this study to better understand Internet service providers' privacy practices in light of the evolution of telecommunications companies into vertically integrated platforms that also provide advertising-supported content,” the agency said in a statement. “Under current law, the FTC has the ability to enforce against unfair and deceptive practices involving Internet service providers.”
The Federal Communications Commission passed ISP privacy rules under the Obama administration requiring consumers to opt-in consent to use or sell customer data that could be used for targeted ads. But they were rolled back when the Trump administration took office in 2017 and reversed a 2015 agency decision to reclassify broadband internet access as a common carrier service regulated by the FCC and repealed net neutrality. That returned oversight of consumer privacy of broadband, wireless and internet companies to the FTC under a memorandum of understanding between the agencies.
The FTC's action comes as pressure is building from privacy advocacy groups and in state and federal legislatures for more consumer protections on users' personal data.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
How Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readFTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250