And let no one go offended

FTC probably read Roadside Picnic authored by genius soviet writers Arkadiy and Boris Strugatsky and used the core idea of the poem while prepared a case against internet giants. And now it, finally, reached the final stage - court.

In the ’90s a monster that crushed everyone was Microsoft and was punished for that quite a lot. Now it’s a whole knot called FAANG. So far, the complaint is about only two of five heroes - Facebook and Google.

Strange but the lawsuit did not start a discussion and analysis of the situation in media. Although, retrospectively, these lawsuits have been prepared for several years and clearly will be still. What is the claim to the titans of the industry and why exactly did these two companies of the bunch of internet giants get first under the hammer of justice?

Google and Facebook have one thing in common - monopoly and aggressiveness. Google is more mature and experienced thus already a less aggressive and more accurate market player. It`s engaged in improving the supply rather than creating and capturing new areas. Facebook, unlike a senior fellow, is a company of one person, and actively buys competitors who can beсome Kronos in the future.

There are a few dozens of advertising networks and related companies on the market. Most sites earn on ads not only from Google, but also, at least, from one or two competitors. Whereas there is no equivalent replacement for Instagram and WhatsApp. Google softly (as for such a colossus) and gently forces its advertising products. While Facebook just like a black hole pulls in all available information and uses any opportunity to increase the time users spend in the products ecosystem. And this, in part, leads to the segmentation of the Internet to the InternetS, regarding which the best minds of mankind have been warned and worried for many years already.

But do not forget that for FB, same as for the popular search engine, the main source of earnings is ads. And the giants entered into a joint secret agreement under which Zuckerberg’s company receives preferences in an advertisement, and for that doesn’t push Google.

But forget about advertisement per se. After all, it must be delivered somehow. And if everything is clear with the social network, Google has a different ace in your pocket - Android. Officially it is a free and open mobile OS (except for some nuances). It`s installed on billions of varieties of devices - from phones and tablets to NAS and IoT devices. And there is Chrome also built on a free and open (see above) browser engine. Both are factories to collect personal data, analyze, and improve advertisement targeting. A beautiful ecosystem in its fullness!

This complexity and presence of Google and Facebook in all spheres, multiplied by the popularity of non-core products is the idea behind the possible separation of companies. And by this bring back the competition to the market.

Among the other internet giants - Amazon, Apple, and Netflix - is not yet very clear what to do with only the last two. To divide Amazon into “parts” was challenged by large investment companies a few years ago already. After all, the diamond in Bezos’s crown is only Amazon Web Services. All other businesses (except the advertising) exist thanks to the cloud profits, while either grow.

According to the investors, designating Amazon’s cloud business into a separate company would only increase its market value, also increase the cost of the shares of the retail business. The situation with Netflix and Apple is a little more complicated.

Apple’s serious sin, at the moment, is tax avoidance. Attempting to smooth the US government, the company even returned some production from China to its homeland and promised to increase production. Although I do not exclude that the story with the monopoly of the AppStore will still get a sequel in the coming years.

So far Netflix seems to be the most harmless of the abovementioned trinity: grows peacefully, does not absorb anyone, competitors are many, and do grow like yeast. On the other hand, these competitors may force an antitrust investigation against the streaming giant, just as Oracle pushed the case against Google. And it’s not about revenge for Java, it’s about competition in the marketing and advertising market, although it would seem companies are not particularly competitors there.

In recent history already were two interesting showcases lawsuits against major monopolies: AT&T and Microsoft. Both are interesting because allow us to correlate the current giants to a particular lawsuit and assess the possible consequences. If to consider it completely binary - Facebook, Google, and Amazon are “AT&T,” whereas Netflix and Apple are rather like “Microsoft” of Gates time. In general, in the next few years, it will be very interesting to observe the development of the situation both with existing lawsuits and new ones. As well as possible legislative initiatives that could follow as a result of findings and court decisions.