Wired

Google Limits Access to Airfare Data, Risking Antitrust Concerns

In 2010, when Google paid $700 million to acquire airline-data company ITA Software, the Department of Justice scrutinized the deal for antitrust issues. The deal was ultimately approved, but one condition of the approval required Google to allow others to access the data for five years. Now, seven years later, Google is cutting off access to ITA data for some companies that rely on it. This week Google announced it would cancel QPX Express, an airline-data service it has offered to small businesses and startups since 2014.

Will Facebook Kill All Future Facebooks?

Since 2012, Facebook has repeatedly copied or acquired social-media apps that gain traction. There’s the Instagram deal, and more astonishingly, its $22 billion acquisition of WhatsApp. Facebook attempted to acquire Snap for $3 billion, was turned down, and made at least 10 attempts to copy its most distinctive features. Recently, Facebook acquired tbh, an anonymous app for teens that has bubbled up in recent months. Facebook likely found out about tbh through one of its other acquisitions.

The Solution to Facebook Overload Isn't More Facebook

[Commentary]  In order to preserve our political democracy, which elevates the most popular among us (though perhaps not the finest) to power, we’ll seemingly abandon a total democracy of thought, which does the same for ideas. You can judge a people by how much freedom they can tolerate without destroying themselves. It seems the power for anyone to go viral and attain a global audience, through articulate reasoning or just clickbait-y libel, was a just bit too much freedom for us to bear.

Only Congress, Not the FCC, Can Fix Net Neutrality

[Commentary] In 2006, House Republicans passed legislation empowering the Federal Communications Commission to enforce the Open Internet Policy Statement, but the bill died in the Senate. In 2010, a court blocked the FCC’s subsequent attempt to enforce the policy statement. Democrats wanted legislation, and Google and Verizon even negotiated a deal. Congressional Republicans wanted to negotiate after retaking the House. By then, the FCC had already issued its first net neutrality rules, which partially failed in court in 2014. The following year, Republicans offered a deal, and Democrats have stonewalled since. Lawmakers should enshrine rules against blocking and throttling, enforced by either the FCC or the Federal Trade Commission, and deny the FCC a blank check over the internet. Until Congress acts, telecom Groundhog Day will keep replaying over and over and over.
[Szóka is president of TechFreedom]

Internet Democracy Is Great … in Theory. Just Ask the FCC

The Federal Communications Commission says it wants to hear from you about the future of net neutrality. But in opening its virtual doors to the public, it’s also opened them to spammers and trolls, some of whom might have even managed to knock the FCC’s site offline this past week.

On the one hand, these problems are mere hassles: The FCC’s site was only down for a few hours, and the flood of spam was easy to identify. On the other hand, they show just how hard it is to turn the web into a platform for democratic participation. Just look at any comments section on the internet.

Trump’s Campaign Can’t Just Erase History on the Internet

President Donald Trump's overhauled campaign website looks a lot like the original: the resident in a suit and red tie, embedded tweets pillorying #FakeNews, and “Make America Great Again” hats for sale in every color (plus camo, of course). But what really stands out is what’s missing: the entire archive of content published on the site prior to January.

The purge began May 8, after one White House reporter asked press secretary Sean Spicer why the campaign website still included references to the Muslim ban. That same day, during oral arguments in the federal appeals case over the Trump administration’s executive order barring travelers from six Muslim-majority countries, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Robert King also pressed Justice Department lawyer Jeffrey Wall about the site. Wall argued that the current ban doesn’t discriminate against people on religious grounds, but King insisted the press release contradicts that claim. “He has never repudiated what he said about the Muslim ban,” Judge King said of the president. “It is still on his website.” Within hours it was gone. Within a day, so was every other pesky press release that might someday prove incriminating.

Here’s What Comes Next in the Fight to Save Net Neutrality

Once Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s notice of proposed rulemaking is approved, which is likely to happen at the FCC’s open meeting May 18, the public will have 60 days to file comments. Then people will have another 30 days to respond to the comments. The FCC’s staff will then have to turn all that feedback into a final order that commissioners will vote on. That process could take months, but based on Pai’s eagerness to re-reclassify broadband providers, you can expect action on that sooner than later.

Senior FCC officials told reporters during a press call that they won’t necessarily be swayed by public opinion. The call for comments is not, they said, a public opinion poll. Fair enough: Sometimes federal agencies have to make unpopular decisions. And if the FCC does vote to scrap net neutrality, it could be a very unpopular decision indeed. Despite growing polarization, a poll conducted by the University of Delaware found that the majority of both Democratic and Republican voters support some form of net neutrality protections.

Net neutrality advocates may have better luck in court than the FCC. Federal agencies must explain sudden policy reversals. If the courts decide that the FCC has acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner, the Title II reversal could be struck down. FCC staff, however, say they are confident that won’t happen. Pai has offered up data suggesting that companies are spending less money building and maintaining their broadband networks as a result of the Title II reclassification, which they believe should be enough to satisfy any legal challenge. Whether those controversial investment stats will be enough to sway the courts remains to be seen.