Avatar 1年前 ⋅ 956 阅读

概要:导读:3 月 8 日,伊丽莎白·华伦(Elizabeth Warren)在纽约皇后区的政治巡演中表示,当选后将拆分 Google、Facebook、亚马逊。第二天,苹果也被加入其中。华伦是民主党主要候选人之一,她要拆分的这 4 家公司,总市值接近...

导读:3 月 8 日,伊丽莎白·华伦(Elizabeth Warren)在纽约皇后区的政治巡演中表示,当选后将拆分 Google、Facebook、亚马逊。第二天,苹果也被加入其中。华伦是民主党主要候选人之一,她要拆分的这 4 家公司,总市值接近 3 万亿美元。每一位创始人都是白手起家起家的偶像企业家,代表美国过去数十年最辉煌的产业。


Here’s how we can break up Big Tech


Team Warren

Mar 8

By Elizabeth Warren


Twenty-five years ago, Facebook, Google, and Amazon didn’t exist. Now they are among the most valuable and well-known companies in the world. It’s a great story — but also one that highlights why the government must break up monopolies and promote competitive markets.

二十五年前,Facebook,谷歌和亚马逊并不存在。现在,他们是世界上最有价值和知名度最高的公司之一。这是一个伟大的故事 - 但也突出了为什么政府必须打破垄断并促进竞争市场。

In the 1990s, Microsoft — the tech giant of its time — was trying to parlay its dominance in computer operating systems into dominance in the new area of web browsing. The federal government sued Microsoft for violating anti-monopoly laws and eventually reached a settlement. The government’s antitrust case against Microsoft helped clear a path for Internet companies like Google and Facebook to emerge.

20世纪90年代,微软 - 当时的科技巨头 - 试图将其在计算机操作系统中的主导地位放在新的网络浏览领域。联邦政府起诉微软违反反垄断法并最终达成和解。政府针对微软的反垄断案件为谷歌和Facebook等互联网公司的出现铺平了道路。

The story demonstrates why promoting competition is so important: it allows new, groundbreaking companies to grow and thrive — which pushes everyone in the marketplace to offer better products and services. Aren’t we all glad that now we have the option of using Google instead of being stuck with Bing?

这个故事说明了为什么促进竞争如此重要:它允许新的、具有开创性的公司发展壮大 - 这促使市场上的每个人都提供更好的产品和服务。我们是否都很高兴现在我们可以选择使用谷歌而不是被Bing困住?

Today’s big tech companies have too much power — too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They’ve bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone else. And in the process, they have hurt small businesses and stifled innovation.

I want a government that makes sure everybody — even the biggest and most powerful companies in America — plays by the rules. And I want to make sure that the next generation of great American tech companies can flourish. To do that, we need to stop this generation of big tech companies from throwing around their political power to shape the rules in their favor and throwing around their economic power to snuff out or buy up every potential competitor.

今天的大型科技公司拥有太多的权力 - 对我们的经济,社会和民主都有太大的影响。他们推翻了竞争,利用我们的私人信息获取利润,圈地为王,不允许其他人进入。在这个过程中,他们伤害了小企业并扼杀了创新。

我希望政府能确保每个人 - 即使是美国最大和最强大的公司 - 遵守规则。我想确保下一代伟大的美国科技公司能够蓬勃发展。要做到这一点,我们需要阻止这一代大型科技公司滥用他们的政治力量来制定有利于他们的规则,并使用他们的经济实力来扼杀或收购所有潜在的竞争对手。

That’s why my administration will make big, structural changes to the tech sector to promote more competition — including breaking up Amazon, Facebook, and Google.

这就是为什么我的管理层将对科技行业进行重大的结构性变革,以促进更多竞争 - 包括分拆亚马逊,Facebook和谷歌。


How the new tech monopolies hurt small businesses and innovation



America’s big tech companies provide valuable products but also wield enormous power over our digital lives. Nearly half of all e-commerce goes through Amazon. More than 70% of all Internet traffic goes through sites owned or operated by Google or Facebook.


As these companies have grown larger and more powerful, they have used their resources and control over the way we use the Internet to squash small businesses and innovation, and substitute their own financial interests for the broader interests of the American people. To restore the balance of power in our democracy, to promote competition, and to ensure that the next generation of technology innovation is as vibrant as the last, it’s time to break up our biggest tech companies.


America’s big tech companies have achieved their level of dominance in part based on two strategies:


  • Using Mergers to Limit CompetitionFacebook has purchased potential competitors Instagram and WhatsApp. Amazon has used its immense market power to force smaller competitors like Diapers.com to sell at a discounted rate. Google has snapped up the mapping company Waze and the ad company DoubleClick. Rather than blocking these transactions for their negative long-term effects on competition and innovation, government regulators have waved them through.
  • 利用并购来限制竞争。 Facebook已经购买了潜在竞争对手InstagramWhatsApp。亚马逊利用其巨大的市场力量迫使像Diapers.com这样的小型竞争对手以折扣价出售。谷歌已经收购了地图公司Waze和广告公司DoubleClick。政府监管机构并没有阻止这些交易对竞争和创新产生负面的长期影响


  • Using Proprietary Marketplaces to Limit Competition. Many big tech companies own a marketplace — where buyers and sellers transact — while also participating on the marketplace. This can create a conflict of interest that undermines competition. Amazon crushes small companies by copying the goods they sell on the Amazon Marketplace and then selling its own branded version. Google allegedly snuffed out a competing small search engine by demoting its content on its search algorithm, and it has favored its own restaurant ratings over those of Yelp.
  • 利用专利市场限制竞争。许多大型科技公司拥有一个市场在这里买卖双方可以交易 - 同时大公司也会参与到这个市场当中去。这可能会产生破坏竞争的利益冲突。亚马逊复制他们在亚马逊商城销售的其他公司的商品,然后包装成自己的品牌,出售自己的品牌来粉碎小公司。据称谷歌通过降低来自一家小型搜索引擎公司的内容搜索算法,来扼杀该竞争对手的小型搜索引擎,并且使得自己得餐馆评级超过另一家生活服务类点评搜索和点评网站Yelp


Weak antitrust enforcement has led to a dramatic reduction in competition and innovation in the tech sector. Venture capitalists are now hesitant to fund new startups to compete with these big tech companies because it’s so easy for the big companies to either snap up growing competitors or drive them out of business. The number of tech startups has slumped, there are fewer high-growth young firms typical of the tech industry, and first financing rounds for tech startups have declined 22% since 2012.


With fewer competitors entering the market, the big tech companies do not have to compete as aggressively in key areas like protecting our privacy. And some of these companies have grown so powerful that they can bully cities and states into showering them with massive taxpayer handouts in exchange for doing business, and can act — in the words of Mark Zuckerberg — “more like a government than a traditional company.”

由于竞争者进入市场的人数减少,大型科技公司不必像保护我们的隐私这样在关键领域开展积极竞争。其中一些公司已经变得如此强大,以至于他们可以欺负城市和州,通过分发大量的纳税人手册来开展业务,并用马克扎克伯格的话来表达 - “更像是政府而不是一个传统公司。

We must ensure that today’s tech giants do not crowd out potential competitors, smother the next generation of great tech companies, and wield so much power that they can undermine our democracy.



Restoring competition in the tech sector



America has a long tradition of breaking up companies when they have become too big and dominant — even if they are generally providing good service at a reasonable price.

长久以来美国有这样一个传统,即当公司变得过于庞大和占主导地位时,公司就会被分拆 - 即使公司通常以合理的价格提供优质的服务。

A century ago, in the Gilded Age, waves of mergers led to the creation of some of the biggest companies in American history — from Standard Oil and JPMorgan to the railroads and AT&T. In response to the rise of these “trusts,” Republican and Democratic reformers pushed for antitrust laws to break up these conglomerations of power to ensure competition.

一个世纪以前,在镀金时代,合并浪潮导致了美国历史上一些最大公司的创建 - 从标准石油公司和摩根大通公司到铁路公司和电信ATT公司。为了应对这些信托的兴起,共和党和民主党的改革者们推动反垄断法打破这些权力集团,以确保竞争。

But where the value of the company came from its network, reformers recognized that ownership of a network and participating on the network caused a conflict of interest. Instead of nationalizing these industries — as other countries did — Americans in the Progressive Era decided to ensure that these networks would not abuse their power by charging higher prices, offering worse quality, reducing innovation, and favoring some over others. We required a structural separation between the network and other businesses, and also demanded that the network offer fair and non-discriminatory service.

但是,在公司的价值来自其网络的时候,改革者认识到网络的所有权和网络的参与者两者会引起利益冲突。进步时代的美国人决定要确保这些网络,不会通过收取更高的价格,提供更差的质量,为减少创新则偏袒其他人而去滥用权力,而不是将这些行业国有化 - 正如其他国家所做的那样。我们要求网络与其他业务之间存在结构性分离,并要求网络提供公平和非歧视性服务。

In this tradition, my administration would restore competition to the tech sector by taking two major steps:


First, by passing legislation that requires large tech platforms to be designated as “Platform Utilities” and broken apart from any participant on that platform.


Companies with an annual global revenue of $25 billion or more and that offer to the public an online marketplace, an exchange, or a platform for connecting third parties would be designated as “platform utilities.”


These companies would be prohibited from owning both the platform utility and any participants on that platform. Platform utilities would be required to meet a standard of fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory dealing with users. Platform utilities would not be allowed to transfer or share data with third parties.


For smaller companies (those with annual global revenue of between $90 million and $25 billion), their platform utilities would be required to meet the same standard of fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory dealing with users, but would not be required to structurally separate from any participant on the platform.

To enforce these new requirements, federal regulators, State Attorneys General, or injured private parties would have the right to sue a platform utility to enjoin any conduct that violates these requirements, to disgorge any ill-gotten gains, and to be paid for losses and damages. A company found to violate these requirements would also have to pay a fine of 5 percent of annual revenue.

Amazon Marketplace, Google’s ad exchange, and Google Search would be platform utilities under this law. Therefore, Amazon Marketplace and Basics, and Google’s ad exchange and businesses on the exchange would be split apart. Google Search would have to be spun off as well.




Second, my administration would appoint regulators committed to reversing illegal and anti-competitive tech mergers.


Current antitrust laws empower federal regulators to break up mergers that reduce competition. I will appoint regulators who are committed to using existing tools to unwind anti-competitive mergers, including:



  • Amazon: Whole Foods; Zappos
  • Facebook: WhatsApp; Instagram
  • Google: Waze; Nest; DoubleClick

Unwinding these mergers will promote healthy competition in the market — which will put pressure on big tech companies to be more responsive to user concerns, including about privacy.

解除这些合并将促进市场的健康竞争 - 这将对大型科技公司施加压力,以更好地响应用户关注,包括用户对隐私的关注。


Protecting the future of the internet



So what would the Internet look like after all these reforms?



Here’s what won’t change: You’ll still be able to go on Google and search like you do today. You’ll still be able to go on Amazon and find 30 different coffee machines that you can get delivered to your house in two days. You’ll still be able to go on Facebook and see how your old friend from school is doing.


Here’s what will change: Small businesses would have a fair shot to sell their products on Amazon without the fear of Amazon pushing them out of business. Google couldn’t smother competitors by demoting their products on Google Search. Facebook would face real pressure from Instagram and WhatsApp to improve the user experience and protect our privacy. Tech entrepreneurs would have a fighting chance to compete against the tech giants.

以下是将要发生的变化:小型企业可以公平地在亚马逊上销售他们的产品,而不必担心亚马逊将他们推倒。 Google无法通过在Google搜索上降级其竞争对手的产品,从而来扼杀竞争对手。 Facebook将面临来自InstagramWhatsApp的真正压力,以改善用户体验并保护我们的隐私。科技创业者将有机会与科技巨头竞争。

Of course, my proposals today won’t solve every problem we have with our big tech companies.

We must give people more control over how their personal information is collected, shared, and sold — and do it in a way that doesn’t lock in massive competitive advantages for the companies that already have a ton of our data.

We must help America’s content creators — from local newspapers and national magazines to comedians and musicians — keep more of the value their content generates, rather than seeing it scooped up by companies like Google and Facebook.


我们必须让人们更好地控制他们的个人信息的收集,共享和销售方式 - 并且这种方式不会为已经拥有大量数据的公司锁定大量竞争优势。

我们必须帮助美国的内容创作者 - 从当地报纸和国家杂志到喜剧演员和音乐家 - 保持他们内容产生的更多价值,而不是看到像谷歌和Facebook这样的公司攫取它们。

And we must ensure that Russia — or any other foreign power — can’t use Facebook or any other form of social media to influence our elections.

Those are each tough problems, but the benefit of taking these steps to promote competition is that it allows us to make some progress on each of these important issues too. More competition means more options for consumers and content creators, and more pressure on companies like Facebook to address the glaring problems with their businesses.

我们必须确保俄罗斯 - 或任何其他外国势力 - 不能使用Facebook或任何其他形式的社交媒体来影响我们的选举。


Healthy competition can solve a lot of problems. The steps I’m proposing today will allow existing big tech companies to keep offering customer-friendly services, while promoting competition, stimulating innovation in the tech sector, and ensuring that America continues to lead the world in producing cutting-edge tech companies. It’s how we protect the future of the Internet.



全部评论: 0