Bit of a sticky subject, but let me try to explain why this is a mess and how to really fix it.
The internet freedom issue has three major problems that need to be solved:
Net Neutrality
Network carriers like AT&T, Verizon, Frontier, Spectrum, Comcast, COX, etc. cannot both operate communications lines and the content delivered across them as it creates a conflict of interest. Carriers also should not allow certain customers to be able to deliver content faster than others over their networks when both customers are paying for the same data rate. In networking, you can allow some traffic to travel faster then other traffic over the same speed line –like an express toll lane on a freeway – as this allows larger and richer companies to easily out compete smaller and poorer companies; It creates an unfair barrier to entry in the streaming entertainment market. For example, if I create the Conservative Streaming Network to stream Dinesh D'Souza 24/7, I could using current SEC and FCC rules buy exclusive rights to D’Souza content, then negotiate a contract with major network carriers to prefer my streaming service traffic over, say, Amazon.com’s. In reality, Amazon and Netflix already have these contracts and often buy exclusivity rights to content, so I would have a hell of a time trying to gain enough capital to out spend the big fish and get the content or the prioritization traffic with the carriers. If I want to stream content owned by one of the carriers (say HBO, which ATT owns), I will have to pay whatever price they want to set, which will result in a higher subscription cost to my customers since ATT can and will charge less (if they allow me to stream HBO content at all) and they can prioritize their service over mine. End result is my customers pay more and experience slower delivery of the content (buffering…) than what ATT offers. Again, I can’t compete.
Copyright and Patent Law
Copyrights and Patents are an essential form of creative protection that a society that respects the rule of law must have and respect. However, they can and are easily abused. This is actually the biggest issue and far outweighs Net Neutrality in harm to the people. It used to be that if I create a unique invention – a thing – I can apply for a patent to claim ownership of the idea. This allows me to sue anyone else who produces the invention for a reasonable period of time. If I create a piece of creative work – written document, painting, sculpture, etc – I can apply for a Copyright which allows me to sue anyone who reproduces or distributes that same work without my authorization for a period of my lifetime plus 50 years (from my memory).
The issue here is that at some point in the 1980s, patent/Copyright lawyers started patenting and copywriting ideas instead of inventions or works. Ideas such as “device for entering text into a digital system” or “display of digital text and/or objects on a television or monitor screen”. These “ideas” are so vague that literally anything technological can fit the test of patent/Copyright infringement. Large companies use this abuse of patent/Copyright law to exert monopolistic force on many industries, especially the technology industry, to the point that if a large firm such as Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, Amanzon, etc decide they don’t want to compete with, say, Conservative Streaming Network, they first try to buy the competition out, and if they refuse, litigate to death using the vague patents or Copyrights they have been hording for the last 20 years. And this has been done over and over again. Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Oracle are the worst offenders.
Mega-Corporations
Markets tend to be dominated by the best players as the market reaches equilibrium in non-monopolistic competitive markets. This means that in industries that produce highly expensive, rare, or complicated goods that require highly skilled workers are usually dominated by the players that offer the goods and services demanded at the prices and needs desired by the most consumers. What these large players have discovered is when the market flatten out (reaches equilibrium), the only way to grow profits is to enter into new markets. So, what do they do? They merge with other companies and grow via acquisition. This is why Apple not only makes computers, but now makes music players, then music distribution, and now produces content; It’s also why Microsoft expanded from making computer operating systems to productivity software, database systems, console gaming, cloud computing, biotechnology, military contracting, etc. It’s the mantra of “grow or die” that has transformed American business into what it is today. The issue is that despite all of the benefits it this has provided society (and there are many), it has now created behemoth companies that dominate not just one market but many. These huge companies are so powerful that they are effective monopolies that use their resources to keep new companies from entering or effectively competing in the market as previously described.
Political Contributions
Corporations are legally “people” and thus can contribute to political causes and candidates. I have thought a lot about this and have come to the conclusion that this needs to be outlawed. A company has far more resources at its disposal than any single person and thus can exert far more influence on politicians than even large groups of the electorate. This means legislation is made and passed that benefits companies and other special interests over the interest of the people. This also creates massive corruption of our political class who answer to the special interests over the people. This just needs to stop.
Now these issues are far more nuanced and complicated than how I have described them, but it kind of gets to the jist.
Now to solve these issues requires four things:
1. Forbid network providers from owning and distributing content or offering some customers priority over their network except for certain essential services such as E911.
2. Reform Copyright and patent law to forbid the filing of vague terms or ideas; only concreate inventions or bodies of work can be patented or copyrighted. A better test needs to be developed to ensure this.
3. Forbid companies from growing past a certain size or into a limited number of industries in an effort to protect market competition.
4. Make political contributions or gifts on any kind from companies, charities, or other organizations illegal. Only individual citizens should be allowed to make contributions, and those contributions should have a maximum limit of no more than $100,000 in a calendar year and must be reported to the IRS and made publicly available via the IRS website.
As addressed elsewhere, first things first. Can anyone point out where in the Constitution is Congress granted an explicitly enumerated power to break up companies?
Right.
Secondarily, prescinding from the (il)legal basis for "trust-busting," the govt is populated with employees like those working at the DMV...do you really want to entrust this sort of thing to THEM?
Third, quite simply, the market is more efficient than the govt. Remember Netscspe? Few people do. But at one time it had 90% of the browser market share. Then Explorer took over, and had 90% market share. Today...IE has between 2-5% market share. Today's leader Chrome (which is AWFUL) is at about 65% market share (except on tablets where it is Safari). In a few years, Chrome will be a has-been too.
Markets don't move as fast as we'd like many times. But that's largely because markets don't work on coercion. The market usually gets it right, and the firms that scare us today likely will be shadows of themselves over time. To wit: here's an example of the firms that used to be Big and Bad that are defanged today.
It happens. It always happens. And yes while we 'suffer' under the lies of FB et al, does anyone really think the Justice Department will get it right? I bet, if Justice got started now, by the time the 2024 election happens and we get some loser Dem in the WH, the case will still be ongoing.
Then it'll be dropped...and then the Dem Justice Dept will sue JimRob to break up Freerepublic. Why? Well, because someone will think FR is too powerful and needs to be destroyed "in the public interest." We will cry "foul" and they'll say "well...the same power you granted the govt out of thin air to kill FB is being evenly-applied to FR."
Nobody has all the answers except God. But, Tucker Carlson just caused Twitter to go down. Not the government, but some other force... somehow I suspect the Lord also doesn't like anti-trust law and favors private action.