Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday September 04 2016, @12:38AM   Printer-friendly
from the no-price-does-not-mean-no-cost dept.

https://theconversation.com/are-us-antitrust-regulators-giving-silicon-valleys-free-apps-a-free-pass-63974

U.S. antitrust law is uniquely devoted to a strain of economics often called “price theory.” Beginning in the 1970s, price theory came to dominate antitrust law and scholarship.

Price theory (no surprise) focuses on prices. Supposedly, price theory uses price as a synechdoche to represent all aspects of competition. But in fact, businesses compete not just on price but also on quality, innovation, branding and other product attributes.

Yet U.S. antitrust regulators and courts have traditionally focused heavily on price competition. When products are “free” (or, more accurately, “zero-price”), they simply slip under the antitrust radar.

If the SCOTUS is willing to declare that money is speech, it should be no great leap to recognize that speech can also be money. Wall Street has clearly recognized the truth in that, giving multi-billion dollar valuations to companies that are entirely predicated on reselling their users' attention. How long until American courts catch up with reality?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @07:40AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @07:40AM (#397320)

    > What we are really seeing here is a collision between the idea that you have to pay for services and the ability to make things free through automation and mass collaboration.

    No we aren't. We are paying for services with the currency of our privacy and of our time. This is not some post-scarcity business model, this is all about the scarcity of information about people and people's limited time to consume advertising.

    That you don't recognize what the actual scarce commodities are here is a perfect illustration the myopia of the article talks about.