Amazon faces landmark monopoly lawsuit by FTC
WASHINGTON听–听The US Federal Trade Commission filed a long-awaited antitrust听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟听against听础尘补锄辞苍.com on Tuesday and asked the court to consider forcing the online retailer to sell assets as the government accuses Big Tech of monopolizing the most lucrative parts of the internet.
罢丑别听贵罢颁听补肠肠耻蝉别诲听Amazon, a company started in a garage in 1994 and today worth $1.3 trillion, of fighting efforts by sellers on its online marketplace to offer products more cheaply on other platforms.听础尘补锄辞苍聽forces sellers to use its warehouses and delivery services, inflating costs for consumers and聽sellers, the聽贵罢颁听said.
础尘补锄辞苍听is a听尘辞苍辞辫辞濒测听and misuses its powers, according to the听贵罢颁, which quotes a seller as saying: “We have nowhere else to go and听础尘补锄辞苍聽knows it.”
罢丑别听聽after years of complaints that听础尘补锄辞苍.com and other tech giants abused their dominance of search, social media and online retailing to become聽驳补迟别办别别辫别谤蝉听on the most聽profitable aspects聽of the internet.
The need to take聽聽has been one of the few ideas that Democrats and Republicans have agreed on,聽and the聽听补产辞耻迟听础尘补锄辞苍‘s power.
The听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟, which was joined by 17 state attorneys general, follows a four-year investigation and federal听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟s filed against Alphabet’s Google and Meta Platforms’聽Facebook.
The聽贵罢颁听said that it was asking the court to issue a permanent injunction ordering听础尘补锄辞苍聽to stop its unlawful conduct. The听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟听was filed in federal court in Seattle, where听础尘补锄辞苍聽is based.
“Left unchecked,听础尘补锄辞苍聽will continue its illegal course of conduct to maintain its听尘辞苍辞辫辞濒测听power,” the聽贵罢颁听said in its complaint which asked the court “to put an end to听础尘补锄辞苍‘s illegal course of conduct, pry loose听础尘补锄辞苍‘s monopolistic control, deny听础尘补锄辞苍聽the fruits of its unlawful practices, and restore the lost promise of competition.”
The聽贵罢颁听complaint asked for the court to consider “any preliminary or permanent equitable relief, including but not limited to structural relief, necessary to restore fair competition.”
Structural relief in antitrust jargon generally means a company sells an asset, such as a part of its business.
In a press briefing,聽贵罢颁听Chair Lina Khan was asked about the idea of breaking up听础尘补锄辞苍聽but declined to discuss it. “At this stage, the focus is really on liability,” she said.
In other antitrust trials, the court first establishes that the company broke the law and then, if needed, discusses how to remedy that.
础尘补锄辞苍听said that the听贵罢颁听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟听was wrongheaded and would hurt consumers by leading to higher prices and slower deliveries.
“The practices the聽贵罢颁听is challenging have helped to spur competition and innovation across the retail industry, and have produced greater selection, lower prices, and faster delivery speeds for听础尘补锄辞苍聽customers and greater opportunity for the many businesses that sell in听础尘补锄辞苍鈥檚 store,” said David Zapolsky,听础尘补锄辞苍‘s general counsel. In a blog post,聽the company noted that it had聽聽on the platform.
础尘补锄辞苍听shares, which were down 3.2% before the听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟听was announced, traded down 4% in late afternoon trade. Some investors saw upside from the聽lawsuit.
“Either way, the shareholders win. If聽贵罢颁听loses its status quo, if company breaks up, the sum of the parts is greater than the whole as the AWS (cloud) business will command a very high multiple. Analysts will figure this out soon, but for now it’s ‘shoot first, ask questions later,'” said Thomas Hayes,聽肠丑补颈谤听at Great Hill Capital.
The聽贵罢颁听said that听础尘补锄辞苍聽punished sellers that sought to offer prices that were lower than听础尘补锄辞苍‘s by making it difficult for consumers to find the seller on听础尘补锄辞苍‘s platform.
Other allegations include that听础尘补锄辞苍聽gave preference to its own products on its platforms over competitors.
The case, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington state, was assigned to聽John Coughenour, who was nominated to the bench in 1981 by Republican President Ronald Reagan.
‘惭翱狈翱笔翱尝驰听POWER’
Ms. Khan said that听础尘补锄辞苍聽had used illegal tactics to fend off companies that would have risen to challenge its听尘辞苍辞辫辞濒测.
“础尘补锄辞苍听is now exploiting that听尘辞苍辞辫辞濒测听power to harm its customers, both the tens of millions of families that shop on听础尘补锄辞苍‘s platform and the hundreds of thousands of sellers that use听础尘补锄辞苍聽to reach them,” she said.
Ms. Khan, while a law student, wrote about听础尘补锄辞苍‘s dominance in online retailing for “The Yale Law Journal” and was on the staff of the House committee that wrote a report issued in 2020 that advocated reining in聽:听础尘补锄辞苍, Apple, Google and Facebook.
Amazon‘s critics welcomed the听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟.
“No corporation has ever centralized this much power across so many crucial sectors. Left unchecked,听础尘补锄辞苍鈥檚 power to dictate and control threatens the rule of law and our ability to maintain open, democratically governed markets,” said Stacy Mitchell of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, which has pushed for the government to act against听础尘补锄辞苍.
During the Trump administration, which ended in 2021, the Justice Department and聽贵罢颁听opened probes into Google, Facebook, Apple and听础尘补锄辞苍.
The Justice Department has聽聽– once under Republican Donald Trump regarding its search business and a second time on advertising technology since Democratic President Joe Biden took office. The聽贵罢颁听sued Facebook during the Trump administration and Biden’s聽贵罢颁听has pressed forward with the听濒补飞蝉耻颈迟. – Reuters
