“Google isn’t dominant because they broke the law, they are (arguably) breaking the law well after their dominance was established, and that distinction matters when it comes to crafting remedies and regulations that actually work.”
Today on his blog Stratechery, Ben Thompson responds to Tim Wu’s criticism from last week that he overextends the use of his signature “Aggregation Theory” to defend tech giants against antitrust claims. Thompson reiterates that his definition of what he calls “aggregators” does not include companies like Apple and Amazon, which sell physical products.
Both Wu’s critique and Thompson’s response are worth reading in full (but only after you’ve voted, or while you’re standing in line to). It does appear that they actually agree on a number of points, and talk past each other in other places. The quote above from Thompson is his explanation of where he disagrees with Wu, but Wu’s point appears to be that these companies use their scale to break the law, block competition, and cement their dominance. While the tête-à-tête is largely respectful and informative, it’s not without some light mudslinging.
