The huge difference between FTC and EC in terms of the mandate of their operation. Whereas the Sherman Law and FTC are operating with aim to protect customers’ rights or something like that, EC anti-monopoly law is oriented just on that: fighting anti-competitive behaviour. The problem is IMHO that “customer rights” is so flexible term, that (with good support in the campaign contributions, I am sure) it is easy to persuade FTC that almost anything you do is perfectly nice. EC’s anti-monopoly mandate is on the other hand rather strict and inflexible.
Especially when you hire a former Verizon lawyer as head of the FTC, and they do their best to dismantle it from the inside, and then the next person you hire needs to spend a bunch of their time rebuilding what was torn down.
The huge difference between FTC and EC in terms of the mandate of their operation. Whereas the Sherman Law and FTC are operating with aim to protect customers’ rights or something like that, EC anti-monopoly law is oriented just on that: fighting anti-competitive behaviour. The problem is IMHO that “customer rights” is so flexible term, that (with good support in the campaign contributions, I am sure) it is easy to persuade FTC that almost anything you do is perfectly nice. EC’s anti-monopoly mandate is on the other hand rather strict and inflexible.
Especially when you hire a former Verizon lawyer as head of the FTC, and they do their best to dismantle it from the inside, and then the next person you hire needs to spend a bunch of their time rebuilding what was torn down.