University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review’s Post

https://lnkd.in/ebRar7f5 Great time on Schwab Network with Oliver Renick to talk about what you should be watching for in big tech! Use the link below to watch the full segment and find out more by visiting - https://lnkd.in/eFwv8Nd #NotYourAverageAdvisor #SchwabNetwork #BigTech

How should we approach #antitrust policies in an interconnected world? ACI's research shows that when upstream monopolies force partners to share their technological innovations with competitors, it stifles innovation among all downstream firms. Requiring royalty fees for shared technologies can restore incentives and foster a more competitive market. More details are available in our #researchfeature on ACI Perspectives now: https://lnkd.in/gJtyf2XR Research by: Chiu Yu Ko, Bo Shen and Xuyao Zhang Blog article by: Yijia (Joey) Huang #NUSResearch #lkyspp #innovation #chip #ICT #patent #technology #SupplyChain Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy

"This apparent tension between antitrust and national security, however, conceals a third and more critical frame of reference within the tech competition discourse. This third aspect bridges the focus on company-to-company competition and the focus on government-to-government competition by being principally a question of whether the private sector or the public sector should take the lead to define the best ways to use and enable technology." This latest commentary by CSIS affiliate Yinuo Geng addresses the debate on tech competition, national security and the move towards more government regulation. Read here: https://lnkd.in/ddqRWt-T

What is the role of digital platforms in patent protection and market dominance? Join the discourse on #TechRegulation at #GATTC2024 during In-depth Session 3: "The Future of Competition: Digital Platforms, Patent Protection, and Market Dominance."   Navigating the evolving digital landscape: The impact of major tech platforms on global markets and the challenges faced by policymakers. The rise of online giants has reshaped consumption, prompting regulatory responses like the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA) to ensure fair competition. In the U.S., the struggle to reform antitrust laws continues, as lawmakers seek to address concerns about the monopolistic powers of tech giants. A 2020 congressional hearing sparked discussions on restructuring big tech, yet calls for change remain largely unanswered.   The DMA, adopted by the EU in July 2022, signifies a landmark in European tech regulation. Aimed at curbing the power of digital gatekeepers, it has, however, ignited transatlantic tensions. U.S. stakeholders' express worries over potential discrimination against American companies and data security gaps. Enforcement of the DMA intensifies debates on the role of big tech in the EU and the U.S., bringing to light their differing regulatory approaches. The challenge lies in balancing the patent monopoly crucial for innovation against the imperative of fair competition and consumer protection. Providing their expert input will be Dr. Martin Andree, Christina von Busch, Thorsten Kaeseberg, Alina Kontareva, Christian Sommer from the Motion Picture Association and Felix Styma, all expertly moderated by Aspen Digital's Vivian Schiller. For more info: https://lnkd.in/e2fMhVxX

🖥 ⚖ The American Innovation and Choice Online Act (S.2992) is the latest bipartisan effort targeting big tech companies for potential antitrust and consumer choice violations. Introduced in June 2021 by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) and Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) & Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the bill aims to prevent large tech platforms from using their dominance to stifle competition, including practices like "self-preferencing" and exploiting non-public data. 💡 Supporters say: AICO addresses anti-competitive practices, promotes fair competition, and benefits consumers by increasing choice and lowering prices. ⚠️ Critics argue: The bill’s vague language could harm consumers, undermine data privacy, and potentially reduce innovation. 📍 Current Status: The bill was reintroduced in June 2023 but has not yet passed into law. The legislation has gained bipartisan support but still faces strong opposition from major tech firms. 👉 Why It Matters Now: As big tech companies continue to grow in influence and power, there’s an urgent need to revisit and update antitrust laws to reflect the realities of today’s digital economy. AICO could shape the future of competition and innovation in tech. #Tech #Antitrust #BigTech #Innovation #Regulation

#TimWU has spoken recently about the use of "quarantine" for certain digital activities in order to spur innovation. It is an established remedy which did have positive effects on innovation as outlined in the following about the Bell Labs (AT&T) consent decree. Also worth remembering that telecoms and tech are part of the same digital tech stack when designing remedies for current digital cases. Where patent and technology licensing were remedies to exclusivity and foreclosure and opened up markets in the past, opening up interoperability may today be a remedy worth considering in relation to default settings (in the case of Apple's 36% revenue share deal with Google for search ads) and the de facto exclusivity incentives that generates over and above the setting of Google as a default. However, unintended outcomes will also be likely: see article from VOX https://lnkd.in/ecvy_52M

I am delighted to have participated in a panel discussion, "The Future of Competition: Digital Platforms, Patent Protection, and Market Dominance," at the German-American Trade and Tech Conference #GATTC24. We explored the nuances between the US and EU approaches to regulating platforms, the details of #DMA, #DSA, and the #AI Act, and identified potential areas for collaboration. Because the discussion was not recorded, here are my messages that I'd like to emphasize: 🔺 Anticipating Regulatory Shifts: We can expect heightened regulatory pressure in the future. This stems from #platforms evolving from websites into critical digital infrastructures that wield power over society. This power is underexamined, presenting a challenge regulators have yet to fully address. 🔺 EU vs. US Regulatory Approaches: The US regulates domestic firms, whereas Europe regulates global providers of digital services, upon which Europe is structurally dependent. Overall, Europe has little control over these multinational firms and lacks viable domestic alternatives for its citizens. 🔺 Opportunities for Transatlantic Cooperation: The areas for cooperation are technological capacity-building and learning how to mitigate the adverse effects of digital platforms like misinformation. However, this cooperation should foster equal opportunities and support the competitiveness of domestic industries, particularly within Europe. Many thanks to Aspen Institute Germany for the kind invitation and the engaging discussions.

In our latest blog, Partner David Skelton and Director Ewan Lusty outline this year's key tech policy trends in Asia-Pacific. Read the full blog here 👉 https://lnkd.in/eztuWyzy

My colleague, David, and I wrote a short note on what to expect in Asia-Pacific tech policy for 2024. Very happy to chat through the implications for specific businesses over a coffee. The four trends we identified were: 📝 The 'hard-law' vs. 'soft-law' debate: Until now, with exceptions, there has not been the same urgency to introduce mandatory digital rules in Asia-Pacific as in the EU and UK. However, public and industry concern over issues such as fraud, child safety, deep-fakes, and competition in digital markets is increasing the pressure to adopt hard-law regulation. 🗳 The 'year of elections': with Bangladesh, Taiwan, Pakistan, and Indonesia having already held elections, and South Korea and India still to come, there will be intensive scrutiny of the robustness of online platforms' efforts in safeguarding election integrity, and debate over whether additional regulation is necessary to compel a more effective response. ✨ The evolution of the AI debate: Asia-Pacific countries are working out where they stand on the question of how far to regulate AI and what is the best approach to maximise the benefits while minimising the risks. So far, many governments are wary of EU-style broad-based regulation, indicating their preference to target regulatory obligations at high-risk applications. 🌏 The tension between fragmentation and harmonisation: geopolitical tensions and concerns over technological sovereignty will continue to lead some Asia-Pacific governments to implement provisions such as data localisation that make it harder for companies to operate cross-border. At the same time, Singapore, Japan, and South Korea are pressing for greater alignment on AI, data flows, and other issues.