When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do? -- John Maynard Keynes
Showing posts with label FTC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FTC. Show all posts

Monday, January 27, 2014

FTC punishment against Apple 'has no foundation'

The FTC is one sick federal agency -- it ought to be shut down since it glorifies itself wasting tax dollars on meritless cases --

FTC commissioner says in-app purchase punishment against Apple 'has no foundation': In the dissent, which was issued alongside the FTC's own decision, Commissioner Joshua D. Wright echoed Apple chief Tim Cook's own conclusion that the Cupertino, Calif. company had already taken sufficient action — instituting refunds and altering the behavior of in-app purchase prompts — to remedy any hardships caused by children's accidental purchases. The opinion was first spotted by Fortune's Philip Elmer-Dewitt. "When the problem arose in late 2010, press reports indicate that Apple developed a strategy for addressing the problem in a way that it believed made sense, and it also refunded customers that reported unintended purchases," Wright wrote. Given Apple's actions, the "commission has no foundation upon which to base a reasonable belief that consumers would be made better off if Apple modified its disclosures to confirm to the parameters of the consent order," he continued, adding that in "the absence of such evidence, enforcement action here is neither warranted nor in consumers' best interest." Some believe that the commission's order was a political ploy, designed to gain accolades from the electorate at the expense of one of America's most important corporate citizens..."

Typical irresponsible FTC behavior. Congress ought to investigate the shenanigans going on over at the FTC -- pursuing meritless cases against Google, Apple, and other reputable companies!

    

Saturday, April 20, 2013

FTC and FCC asleep at the switch: ISPs injecting ads onto websites

In this era of privacy rights, copyright, and other regulations--how can the FTC and FCC allow this infringement of both users' and web publishers' rights? Based on the following story, and known abuses of video streams by Time Warner and other ISPs, we need stringent, effective regulation of all ISPs by the FTC and FCC to guarantee a free flow of internet data, without interruption or intervention or other manipulation by any ISP. ISPs are just carriers and should now be subject to harsh regulation by Washington after these antics.

How a banner ad for H&R Block appeared on apple.com—without Apple’s OK | Ars Technica: Update: CMA Communications' Terms of Service now contains a section on "Internet Advertising" that is "effective as of April 4, 2013"—a day after Henkel's reddit thread and the same day that I asked them questions about the practice. The section says, in part, that R66T will use a "digital layer which enables aggregated, curated, and created multimedia content and digital information presented in many digital formats" for "the purpose of inserting Information that is informational, promotional, entertaining, location-based, and generates advertising and sponsorship revenue for R66T and CMA." R66T's system is called BlueSky, and CMA has "entered into a contract with R66T to provide the services." (read more at link above)

    

Monday, March 4, 2013

Google Helped Honor FTC Chairman During Agency Inquiry

I hate to be cynical but is this really news? Everyone should know that Washington, today, is just about feeding the hogs at the trough--

Google Helped Honor FTC Chairman During Agency Inquiry - Bloomberg: " . . . At the time, the FTC was investigating whether Mountain View, California-based Google unfairly disadvantaged competing websites by favoring its own services in search results. The agency ended the 20-month antitrust probe on Jan. 3 with no enforcement action. Google agreed to voluntary changes in some search practices and signed a consent decree regarding the use of certain patents. “It’s a little bit odd that they’re donating to Common Sense Media at the exact same time they’re trying to influence Jon Leibowitz,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog group. “It really looks terrible.” Leibowitz, who had been chairman since 2009, announced on Feb. 1 that he would leave the commission. The White House announced today that current commissioner Edith Ramirez will succeed him as chairman. . . . "

It's sad that Google had to spend millions in order to defeat a meritless FTC investigation, but that's the reality of dysfunctional Washington and our so-called public servants like Jon Leibowitz. One wonders why anyone would give an award to any public servant for just doing their job, which after all is paid for by all of us. The whole practice is wrought with corruption, politics, and other vices.

    

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

The Revolving Door: Jon Leibowitz Resigns as FTC Chairman

Goodbye and good riddance--this is the guy who wasted almost 2 years and millions of taxpayer funds on a meritless case against Google search, hiring expensive outside counsel for that matter (what a sweetheart Washington insider contract!), and the result? 5-0: no action against Google. A complete waste of time and resources.

But as always, his tenure wasn't a complete failure (how could it be with the FTC super-sized staffing and budget?); here's an excerpt from the New York Times--

Jon Leibowitz Resigns as F.T.C. Chairman - NYTimes.com: "Other Democrats, including some consumer advocates, were less generous in their assessment, although none of them wanted to speak on the record. They noted, however, a few areas where the F.T.C. did not block merger actions, including a $2 billion proposal to join the Universal Music Group and EMI, two large record labels. Last year, the commission also approved the $29 billion merger of two of the nation’s largest pharmacy-benefit managers, Express Scripts and Medco Health Solutions. If only because it was his last big effort, however, the Google case is likely to be the one that is foremost in people’s minds over the next few years. Mr. Leibowitz sought the case, winning a cordial but tense battle with the Justice Department’s antitrust division over the right to investigate Google’s search practices."

    

Monday, January 7, 2013

Antitrust, Politics, Economics

As a follow-up to my post yesterday Google Has Learned The Ways of Washington--Government Bureaucrats, Lawyers, Lobbyists, $$$, I couldn't pass up posting an excerpt from the following--

Jenkins: Al Gore Is Good at Rent-Seeking (and Microsoft Isn't) - WSJ.com: " . . . Microsoft still tries to make money by selling consumers products they want, though it has launched some stinkers in this regard . . . its latest stinker was more up Mr. Gore's alley: a multimillion-dollar investment in trying to foment a government antitrust crackdown on Google. That effort went conspicuously bust Thursday when the Federal Trade Commission let Google go with token remonstrances about its business practices. . . . As FTC chief Jon Liebowitz acknowledged this week, antitrust agencies live to bring "big cases." The FTC staff, whose revolving-door career interests would be enhanced by a Google prosecution, was an easy sell. Less so the agency's political appointees who must decide yea or nay. The media wasn't clamoring for a Google crackdown. Congress was less than enthusiastic. The Obama White House, known to be close to Google, was disturbingly mute. Antitrust is supposed to be entirely about clinical economics but never is. FDR's antitrust chief Thurman Arnold once said that antitrust was a collective squeal of resentment against businesses that annoy us with their success. Google hasn't been sufficiently annoying. Notice, by the way, that the astute Arnold went on to found Arnold & Porter, one of the great Beltway law firms . . ."

   

Sunday, January 6, 2013

Google Has Learned The Ways of Washington--Government Bureaucrats, Lawyers, Lobbyists, $$$

Washington DC produces nothing but deficits, legislation, regulations, and bureaucracy. But that vast ecosystem, which sucks money from the rest of the nation, is now the wealthiest metropolitan area in the USA--recession?--not in Washington where government continues to spend, and lobbyists and lawyers get fat and rich, while the rest of the nation has suffered through the worst recession since the Great Depression.  Also, Washington has taught everyone else a lesson--if you get too big and successful (like Google) then "we will bring you down"--if nothing else you will have to spend years explaining your business processes and industry practices to bureaucratic morons at agencies like the FTC which open investigations on meritless claims ("FTC never had compelling evidence against Google, and its lengthy and expensive investigation came up essentially dry"); the FTC even hired expensive, outside Washington counsel because (apparently) FTC staff counsel is too incompetent and inept. Nonetheless, Silicon Valley is wise to the ways of Washington, and hence Google knew it would have to pay the "tax" levied by the FTC and other inquiring agencies of the US government--the "tax" being the cost to hire lobbyists and lawyers (as well as the opportunity cost of diverting corporate resources to deal with and counter the FTC "investigation")--some might even call the FTC investigation a government-sponsored "shakedown"--after all, we all know the revolving door between government and law firms and lobbying firms in Washington D.C.--

How Google beat the feds - Tony Romm - POLITICO.com: "Google escaped from a nearly two-year federal antitrust probe with only a few scratches by proving that the best defense is a good offense. Instead of ignoring Washington — as rival Microsoft did before its costly monopolization trial in the 1990s — Google spent about $25 million in lobbying, made an effort to cozy up to the Obama administration and hired influential Republicans and former regulators. The company even consulted with the late Robert Bork and The Heritage Foundation and met with senators like John Kerry to make its case. In other words, these traditional outsiders worked the system from the inside."

The FTC Smartly Ends Its Imprudent Google Search Antitrust Investigation - Forbes: " . .  . Fortunately for Google, throwing money at the problem seemed to work really well . . . But is that really how the system’s supposed to work? Google wasn’t the only player spending like a drunken sailor. The FTC hired an expensive outside lawyer and invested countless staff hours. And Google’s enemies spent plenty of money themselves, both directly and through advocacy groups like Microsoft's "FairSearch."  For example, Microsoft has put on its own event (both in DC and in Europe), and see this San Jose Mercury News list of Microsoft-supported influencers (the article also tries to enumerate Google beneficiaries). With the FTC investigation over, we might project a recession in the legal industry when all of this money stops sloshing around. In the end, though the FTC reached the right result from its investigation, the money avalanche left me with a queasy stomach. As the cynical maxim goes, “he who has the gold makes the rules.” When titans clash over antitrust matters, it’s a fine line between justice being served and justice being bought."

Yes, unfortunately, that is how the dysfunctional Washington system works. And the sad thing is, the staff and Commission of the FTC probably think they are operating in the public interest--really! What a waste of resources. Another sign of America in decline.

There once were concepts of public service and stewardship of public resources (including taxpayer funds) in Washington. No more. Today, in Washington, it's just about feeding the Hogs at the Trough.

Saturday, January 5, 2013

The FTC, Microsoft and Google

The comment excerpt to the Microsoft response to Google's victory before the FTC (an investigation which should never have been opened and was a monumental waste of taxpayer funds)--

The FTC and Google: A Missed Opportunity - Microsoft on the Issues - Site Home - TechNet Blogs"Microsoft, please stop complaining. Start innovating. The Internet is the most level, ultimate playing field. And just because you're losing doesn't mean you should try to paint the winner as evil."

and the following article says it all about how lame Microsoft is when it comes to competing with Google--

Google's FTC Settlement Is An Epic Fail For Microsoft"Microsoft had a pretty lousy year in 2012, putting out a string of big products – Windows 8, Windows Phone 8 and the Surface tablet – that all turned out to be be disappointing. But those pale in comparison to what may be the biggest disappointment in Microsoft’s history — its failure to convince antitrust regulators to take action against Google. After a 19-month investigation and despite much prodding from Microsoft, the Federal Trade Commission has reached a settlement with Google that basically amounts to a slap on the wrist. This is a crushing blow to Microsoft, which has spent millions of dollars on lobbyists and phony grassroots groups over the past several years hoping to land Google in hot water. Indeed, Microsoft’s obsession with Google doesn’t just border on crazy. It is crazy, and not just a little tiny bit crazy but full-blown, bunny-boiling, Ahab-versus-the-whale nutso. . . . "

Microsoft's idea of innovation and competing is to run to government agencies and get them to open investigations on competitors based on meritless claims. At some point, you would think the government would have enough sense to quit asking "how high" when Microsoft says "jump."

    

Thursday, January 3, 2013

FTC Announcement Concerning Its Investigation of Google

FTC to Make Announcement Concerning Its Investigation of Google: ". . . regarding the specific allegations that the company (Google) biased its search results to hurt competition, the evidence collected to date did not justify legal action by the Commission,” said Beth Wilkinson, outside counsel to the Commission. . . . the FTC’s mission is to protect competition, and not individual competitors. The evidence did not demonstrate that Google’s actions in this area stifled competition in violation of U.S. law.”"

Right decision--just a shame that the FTC wasted millions of dollars and 2 years investigating Google for meritless claims.

   

Monday, December 17, 2012

FTC nominee Joshua Wright to skip Google cases

FTC nominee Joshua Wright to skip Google cases - Tony Romm and Elizabeth Wasserman - POLITICO.com: "The Obama administration nominated Wright at the suggestion of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Republicans support Wright because of his long-standing, free-market, light-touch views on antitrust enforcement. But the nominee quickly faced criticism because his prior research cautioned against any antitrust probe of Google, a case the FTC is currently pursuing — albeit one that could be finished before the end of the year. On one hand, recusal could help Wright win the support of lawmakers who may have been on the fence about his nomination. The panel’s chairman, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), did not comment Friday on whether he would press Wright on the matter at the hearing. However, if confirmed, Wright may also sit out other enforcements related to Google — cases involving privacy, for example, an area in which the company and regulators have tangled. . . . "

Wright sounds like a good nominee, but I'm sorry he is going to recuse himself on Google cases. We desperately need his point of view on the FTC which has been seriously off-track in pursuing weak and meritless cases against Google.

    

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

FTC does not have a case against Google

Finally--it appears some sanity is prevailing in Washington--

Google may dodge FTC's antitrust bullet, report says | Internet & Media - CNET News: "Regulators aren't sure they have enough evidence for an antitrust lawsuit and are examining whether consumer benefits of Google's search approach outweigh harm to competitors, Bloomberg reported, citing three unnamed sources."

No kidding--this was obvious to most non-biased people a LONG time ago--in the meantime the FTC has wasted millions in taxpayer funds chasing a meritless case, hiring expensive outside counsel (I would love to know the particulars of that "sweetheart" personal services contract--"only inside the beltway"), just to harass one of the most respected companies in the world--and a large generator and platform of new businesses which use Google apps and other services at low, or no cost.

Microsoft and some other competitors of Google have been lobbying the FTC and other federal departments and agencies to "harass" Google--
"Those rallying opposition to Google include two industry groups, FairSearch.org and Icomp; Microsoft is a member of both groups, but other companies involved with the groups include comparison shopping sites Foundem and Nextag and travel sites Kayak, Expedia, TripAdvisor, and Hotwire."
And of course I am sure China and radical foreign Islamists (YouTube anyone?) who oppose Google's stance on free speech and a free internet would also want the FTC to do their dirty work.

As one commenter on the above cited article wrote--
"Why not investigate whether sufficient legal authority to hire outside council [sic] ever existed in this case. 'Microsoft told me to.' is not legal justification for wasting taxpayer money and trashing the Constitution."

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

FTC v. Google

The FTC v. Don't Be Evil--I wrote about this months ago in another case of government abuse and waste of taxpayer funds--(the FTC loves to waste taxpayer funds persecuting Google)--

Federal Lawyer Crows After Imposing $22.5 Million Government Fine on Company | The Weekly Standard: "As the New York Times reports, "The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday fined Google $22.5 million to settle charges (it's actually a consent decree/settlement--see below) that it bypassed privacy settings in Apple’s Safari browser to show advertisements, and violated an earlier privacy settlement with the agency.". . .  The (FTC's) lawyer, Megan Gray, who just started working for the FTC, was so pleased to beat back Google that she sent an email to friends and colleagues to brag about her performance. "I'm pleased to report that my new gig at the FTC has started with a bang," writes Gray.". . . Upon my arrival, I was made first-chair trial counsel in the case against Google for privacy violations under the comprehensive Consent Order that became effective last year.  With a fantastic team working with me, we were able to obtain a $22,500,000 million settlement . . . I will be continuing as lead enforcer on the Consent Order . . . " Gray concludes her email by giving friends and colleagues a personal email address to reach her, but, she says, "For sensitive work matters, phone is best." After all, one wouldn't want to leave a paper trail that the American public might otherwise find! . . ."

The Weekly Standard goes on to reprint Gray's and other FTC personnel's Facebook entries about the FTC/Google matter--which are hardly professional--"Google is paying with black eyes as well as greenbacks."

Also note, for the record, something the "brilliant" lawyers and staff of the FTC don't readily admit: Google's Privacy Settlement Denies Liability (Again): "The FTC order states that the defendant, Google, "denies any violation of the FTC Order, any and all liability for the claims set forth in the Complaint, and all material allegations of the Complaint save for those regarding jurisdiction and venue."" Apparently the "bang" was not quite the victory Gray would have everyone believe, in fact, Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch dissented--"I dissent from accepting this consent decree because it arguably cannot be concluded that the consent decree is in the public interest when it contains a denial of liability." He goes on to say, "$22.5 million represents a de minimis amount of Google’s profit or revenues."

In other words, it appears Google got rid of a nuisance complaint for chicken feed--but the FTC lawyer thinks she's done a "great job."  Heaven help us--boy do we need CHANGE in Washington.

Final note to Gray and the FTC: we're not impressed. (Apparently neither is anyone else--see the transcript of Megan Gray "chat" here.)

    

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

FTC Wastes Taxpayer Funds "Investigating" Google

Obama administration's war on business (and waste of taxpayer money) continues:

FTC brings in former government prosecutor to dig deeper into Google’s business practices - The Washington Post: "Wilkinson is best known for helping to convict Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh in 1997. Now a partner at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, in Washington, D.C., Wilkinson also has experience in antitrust law and white-collar criminal cases. The FTC stressed that Wilkinson’s hiring shouldn’t be interpreted as a sign it intends to sue Google Inc. “We are delighted to have someone of her caliber helping us on such an important matter,” said Richard Feinstein, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition."

Delighted? Really? Here's a question no one seems to be asking: why are taxpayer funds being used (wasted) to pay a high-priced D.C. lawyer working a no-bid government contract to provide legal services to pursue a meritless claim against a legitimate business (Google) that has done nothing wrong?

Also, how much will Google have to spend to defend itself against the FTC's waste of taxpayer funds?

Does the FTC not have any legitimate work to do? Perhaps the Romney administration should abolish or severely cut back funding of the FTC as it seems to have gone "astray" and is lost in its "inside the beltway" bureaucratic mentality.

Thankfully, I am not alone--others are waking up to the FTC's waste of resources hassling Google:

Economists tell FTC to 'buzz off' on Google antitrust investigation | The Daily Caller: "Economists have had it with the forceful gaze of government regulators directed at Google. 101 economists from some of the nation’s most distinguished universities, and from the National Taxpayers Union, expressed concern over the swath of scrutiny directed at Google in an open letter published Monday. The Federal Trade Commission recently announced it hired a prominent outside litigator as part of its current antitrust investigation into Google. The NTU letter openly criticized the antitrust regulatory framework that the government has forced businesses to operate under, claiming that it is doing more harm than good to the economy. . . “Policymakers should instead deploy their talents on restructuring our broken, burdensome regulatory and fiscal management systems in order to foster strong competition and economic growth into the future,” the economists wrote."

Read more: http://www.ntu.org/news-and-issues/telecom/57an-open-letter-to-public.html

   

The Big Picture

Financial Crisis - The Telegraph

JohnTheCrowd.com | The Sailing Website

Craig Newmark - craigconnects