Slashdot Mirror
FCC Staff Back AOL-Time Warner Deal
Donavan writes "Yahoo Finance is reporting that the merger between AOL and Time Warner has been reccomended for approval."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
True. But it indicates that the initial leaning is to approve the merger if certain conditions are accepted.
I think this merger is a bad idea. AOL already wants it's users to think that *it's* the Internet. I can only imagine what would happen when the new company also owns all the content. I'm afraid AOL/TW users would only see what AOL/TW wants them to. I don't know that other sites would be blocked, but I imagine it would certainly be harder to get to them.
Just look around, you'll see that Time Warner is a member of the RIAA and MPAA, which means that they want to proprietarize the formats (i.e., shun MP3 and go for SDMI). They are already screwing with the DVDs; my copy of The Green Mile won't let me jump to a chapter until I stop that stupid WB logo thing and press play AGAIN.
By the very well known fact that AOL makes its users connect with a proprietary protocol (AOLNet) which is translated to TCP by a very unstable network adapter emulator. On the same hardware that would get a 200 ping with standard PPP, an AOL connection usually never goes below 400ms. Also, webpages and UDP transmissions are routed through AOL's main servers, cached there, then transferred to the user (case in point, AOL's FTP client which shows a "Downloading 144K..." before you download the actual file. With this setup, AOL users can only play a Q2 multiplayer game for 30 seconds before the connection is lost. Heretic 2 works, but it really stinks. Same for Quake 3. Also, users are FORCED to use AOL on Windows 9X or MacOS(Windows 2000 can run AOL almost perfectly; the "AOL adapter" won't load as a true network adapter, so the Internet is inaccessible). Also, have you ever noticed that the Mac side of AOL gets treated a whole lot better than the PC side? That's because Steve Case is a Mac user; always was, always will be. There are even rumors of him consorting with Steve Jobs (in more ways than one). AOL's legacy of hypocrisy will eventually be its downfall; look at their commercials ("AOL is about security"), and then read the thousands of stories about hackers breaking into AOL and stealing personal information (as easy as fish in a barrel).
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
You're just jealous because They are successful, aren't you?
-BrentThe biggest thing that bugs me about all this is that so many people whine that Microsoft shouldn't be broken up because they were just "successful", even though their "success" was due to breaking the law. Yet at the same time they say that it's wrong for 2 successful companies to want to be more successful.
I find this the height of all hypocrisy. Let's punish companies that break the law by breaking them up. But if a company is successful, let's let them be more successful as long as they haven't broken the law. Neither AOL or Time Warner has been proven to have broken the law. So if they believe that the deal will make them be more successful, then they should be free to do it.
-BrentThat wasn't, and still doesn't seem to be a concern with Microsoft. So, why should they stop one company, and not another.
If AOL/Time Warner eventually breaks Anti-trust law, tehn they should get the same right to drag a court case out for years and years like MS did.
-BrentAll you people over the years always ragging on Microsoft for being too big. You regreted letting it get that large and swore you would not let let happen again. You casted your eyes so much so upon Microsoft that you let an even bigger Monopoly form.
YOU FOOLS! YOU SHALL NOW FEEL THE WRATH OF AOL/TIMEWARNER HAHAHA! $25 DOLLAR CD's! $50 DOLLAR DVD's, BUSY SIGNALS, BUSY SIGNALS, BUSY SIGNALS!!!
I think half the Napster users in America have just become Time Warner's bitches.
Where do you want it today? (Insert Evil Laughter Here)
Yeah, and where is Caldera? Redhat? They're at 20% of where they were at the beginning of the year. What about Gateway, Dell, Sun, VA Linux et al? They're far below where they were at the begininning of the year too. The whole technology market is down. MSFT is down, but it's down less than most of the other computer stocks.
kwsNI
It's sad, but I have been finding myself more and more often rooting for people who want to take this country's economy and flush it down the shitter. Why? If the economy collapses then a depression will ensue. A depression is the only thing that'll get americans out of their own little private stupors and remove the people from power who have quietly stolen all their rights and given them the crumbs of capitalism - the big screen TVs and SUVs.. when the things that are important like health insurance and retirement (social security / welfare) get axed.
Yeah, horray for the EU.. go kick some yankee ass. Maybe I'll move there and pretend I love the prince and replace my swearing with bloody this and bloody that.
*sigh* Where are the patriots of this country when one really needs them? Busy preparing for armageddon in mountana, instead of here, online, fighting the real revolution.
--
Well, I think you're mistaken that the European Union supercedes the FCC, where each have distinct yet seperate duties.
The FCC really isn't supposed to look after the welfare of the consumer. It's basically supposed to ensure that the communications resources are managed properly.
On the other hand the article you linked says, "The snag adds to worries expressed by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, which is prepared to block the proposed $125 billion deal unless the companies agree to let competing services use their high-speed cable lines.".
Which would suggest that not just the European Union is interested in blocking the deal.
What this all boils down to, is I agree with you, it doesn't matter what the FCC thinks, but for different reasons.
You see, it would be like the EPA approving a merger between BP and Amoco (a recent oil industry merger for those wondering). It's immaterial, and isn't up to them.
The merger still can't happen in the US until the FTC - Federal Trade Commission - says that it can, and as reported before, they're putting a bit of pressure on the deal to make sure that AOL/TW would play fair with others.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
In some areas of the U.S., the choice may be to put up with AOL/TW or have no internet access at all (or have to go with slow dial up or more expensive means of getting connected). Why do I suspect that that's a choice you wouldn't want to be forced to make?
--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
There was a show on Nick, Rocko's Modern Life, which referred to some humongous corporation as Conglomo, which pretty much ran everything - funny
In Alien there was "the company" - not funny, but intriguing
There's this common theme of fear in our literature of some big capitalist entity controlling every aspect of our lives, from media to where we can go today. Probably best exemplified by the Zaibatsus of Japan (Nissan ran Manchuria prior to and during WWII) cradle to grave handling of people. We're heading that way, IMHO, and the FCC, which is empowered (or should be) by the people is letting it happen. I certainly hope there's some plan in the FCC to guarrantee something to the effect of public access over these things. Perhaps it's best to look over your shoulder at this behavior the next time someone in the House warms up the privitazation of PBS topic.
Seems to me that a cooperative effort between PBS, NPR and FREENET would be the ticket.
It's all true! ±5%
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Since when is it the government's responsibility to police companies that might, in the future, break the law? The government thinks that because AOL/Time-Warner could become such a large company that they might do what MS did, they should regulate MS now.
Look at what the government accomplished with the MS trial. MS is still the same company it is today. It's still purchasing smaller competitors as fast as it can. The DOJ/MS lawsuit brought down every tech stock on the market except for MSFT.
kwsNI
This looks irrelevant. Did the person to whom you are responding say anything positive about the Baby Bell monopolies? It is easier to prevent a monopoly from forming than to eliminate one that is already in existence. Most US law on the matter is geared to doing this rather than engineering break-ups or regulation. Hence in advocating an active anti-trust policy, it seems perfectly consistent to worry about AOL/TW first.
Now I'm going to rant in a manner not necessarily directed at you: I've often wondered why phone/cable lines shouldn't be opened to competitors. The Baby Bells and cable companies have their wires on land that they don't own---by grace of local and state governments. Even barring anti-trust action, we are not living in a libertarian paradise; the government has already intervened on behalf of the monopoly. This is a substantial government conceived barrier of entry for competitors. It seems that the "pure" free-market solution to access of diverse services from cable/telephone monopolies would be to let private property owners rent out the land and refuse to rent it out if they are not receiving the services they want.
Do the pure libertarians among us really feel that private individuals should be able to do this? If so, I'll give them points for consistency, if not practicality. Otherwise, I'll have to say that much of the more rabid free-market hype I see on this issue is just that, hype.
FWIW, I'm fairly enthusiastic about free markets myself and I'm not particularly against big business. But I do see an important role for antitrust law, particularly in cases where government has already helped in setting up a "natural" monopoly.
Won't it be a problem if the companies are merged in the US, but not in Europe. Seems kinda wierd...
Find funky gifts
... that the European Commission has yet to decide whether such a merger would be legal in Europe...
ManicHawk - Just because you're manic doesn't mean the walls aren't bouncy
what do people thing of this part "The Federal Trade Commission in Washington and the European Union in Brussels, are also reviewing the deal. Both agencies harbour strong concerns about the merger amid growing worry that too much video programming, Internet content and music is controlled by too few corporate hands." Reading between the lines, maybe, just maybe someone may have noticed the power that RIAA and MPAA have been displaying in their respective cases (Napster,mp3.com/DeCSS). Well power is not the right word, "thirst for control" maybe.
Man, you got to feel sorry for these multi-billion dollar, global corporations. They have to hire lobbyists in *so* many countries...
I really wonder what AT&T thinks about all of this to do with AOL and Time Warner. AOL is a competitor of AT&T in both the home internet and long distance telephone market. Will they bury the hatchet and play nice and make money together or will AT&T pull out of Time Warner?
Good is never enough, when you dream of being great!
If anyone had bothered to read the article they would realize that the FCC doesn't back the merger yet. They haven't even decided on the conditions of the merger.
As long as they follow the rules that the FCC and
the European Union set before they should not have
a problem. When they start beating up on to many
people. Then they we all need need to step in and
speak up.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 21, 2000
MediaBusters Inc.
391 Pipeline Rd.
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Canada R2P 2T4
Media concentration has gone far enough. The sham of government regulation is over. MediaBusters announces the Global Media Consumer's Union -- offering bulk copying and redistribution of copyrighted content available at a fraction of the price of the original. All proceeds support local community development, anti-intellectual property lobbying, and legal defense initiatives. Sign up now at http://www.mediaconsumer.com.
-- 30 --
There is no reason for any government to block the marger of these two companies. What the US and European governments aer doing should disgust you - the governments are extorting the companies and their shareholders to achieve some ill-defined vision of a ordered and regulated telecom industry that is subservient to national interests. This is wrong, and if it were two linux companies that were being scrutinized, you people would be beside yourselves in disgust.
Let the market work. If people don't want to use AOL/TW products, they don't have to - there is competition for both in every market, and it is unclear whether such a merger will even be effective.
The AOL/TW deal will go through. The only question is how many concessions will be made by AOL/TW in the process of getting the deal through. That's the only purpose of this elaborate dance going on right now.
I think that hackers, as a general rule, tend to dislike seeing any one entity gain dominance in an area. Whenever a company gets too big, true geeks get worried. The American legal system works differently, however; the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' still permeates the system. The proposed merger of AOL/TW can't be blocked based on the problems they could cause. Instead, all that can be done is to take all the necessary legal precautions, have all the right people sign all the right promises, then set the behemoth free... and then if it gets out of line, the task begins to rein it in.
I believe that AOL/TW won't quickly or intentionally start to test its legal limits -- it sees what's going on with Microsoft, and the last thing it wants to have happen would be for any legal precedent set in the Microsoft case to be applied in turn to AOL/TW.
All I know is, I was a Compuserve subscriber until recently, and back at the time AOL bought CIS, Compuserve was JUST starting to get good, and switch over to a more internet-centric service, then AOL took over, and it went to hell. I stayed on because I got it free thru work. But connect speeds went down, local numbers evaporated, of course the content also disappeared because people left CIS in droves, so nobody showed in the chatrooms anymore, nobody posted files anymore. Then, for some reason, the time it took to dial into a server multiplied tenfold, so if you wanted to get on the internet, it was an affair that took upwards of 5 minutes or longer if you had to do any retries. Spontaneous disconnects, etc. I thought it was the phone lines, I thought it was my modem.
Then work cancelled my CIS account - and I signed up for Earthlink. I now connect first-time, every time, in about 10-20 seconds, and I don't get randomly disconnected, (which, on CIS took about 10 minutes, first the connection would slow way down, sometimes pick up again, then slow down, then stop, with occasional bursts, then nothing until the dreaded timeout, and disconnect).
Of course, I shun cable, and DSL is not yet available where I live, so I'm still 56k-ing my way, but Earthlink made it sooooo much more tolerable.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
You casted your eyes so much so upon Microsoft that you let an even bigger Monopoly form.
...uh... M$NB ...er... Disney-ABC ...ah... Viacom-Infinity-CBS-WebTV ...um... OH SHUT UP!!!! geez.
Don't be silly! We're protected from the monopoly by competition from
It's all true! ±5%
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I think that this move should be opposed in all ways, shapes, and forms, especially through the Internet. It's far and wide known that AOL sucks, but now Steve Case wants to add Time Warner's armada of their news (television and print), movie, and music divisions to his already bloated coffers. Meanwhile, AOL is getting hacked at least once every week, be it breaking into user records, making more spam, or just plain old flaming in the chat rooms. Nevertheless, AOL wants to launch their broadband service (which, not surprisingly, will STILL get a >400ms ping, compared to the For now, the outlook is bleak, as the conglom-o of TimeAOLWarnerTurner threatens to alienate the multimedia world, its tendrils gnashing away at the consumers' rights.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
This is a huge benefit.
Currently, I'm forced to have RoadRunner as my ISP with this cable modem (AT&T). If the FCC forces broadband providers to open the access to their networks and I have a choice of ISPs - the competition should result in lower prices and better service.
<HUMOR> And as long as I don't have to choose AOL as my ISP, it's a "Good Thing"(tm). </HUMOR>
"Nyahhh *crunch*crunch*crunch* you've got mail, doc!"
I am going to have nightmares about this, I just know it...
End of lesson. You may press the button.
Now the FCC will mostlikely NOT open AOL's IM network and make everyone use AOL's hack. Now a real IETF protocol can mature into the standard.
Another huge business merger that will, eventually, prove to be bad for consumers approved by yet another Govt. agency that rolled over on command. Shame the FCC hasn't kept track of how some of these deals have played out before approving this one. Here in Illinois, phone service quality has taken a nosedive since Ameritech gotten absorbed by SBC. AOL and TW have just successfully pulled off another one of a series of these. It's actually pretty much by the (cook)book and goes something like this:
It's not enough to clean house and get the career politicians out of Washington, you've got to find a way to get the bureacrats out of there too.
--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
The story in question talks about the FCC -the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION. They have no say about anti-trust issues, or anything else of that nature. However, they are in charge of the communications infrastructure, and the only thing that they really can be concerned with is having AOL/TW close all the carrier lines in the US. On CNN's take, the FCC only insisted that AOL/TW have open lines for third parties, which AOL/TW gladly agreed to.
On the other hand, the FTC - FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, is still mulling the issue of anti-trust/monopoly actions on this merger, and the merger cannot happen until they give the gree light. They are still worried about the size and the number of areas that this merged company would control, similar to the EU commission. AOL/TW wants to have the FCC's acceptence in place as another card for dealing with the FTC and EU commission.
The deal is by no ways done. And the concerns of the FTC very much outway those that the FCC would be worried about.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
A year or two down the road AOL/Time will be investigated and forced to break up. It seems to be a pattern which I for one do not understand. Gov: "Sure... go ahead and merge." Gov: "Wait... you guys got too big and powerful... not break up!" A/T: "But... you told us to go ahead and merge and get this large/powerful." Gov: "That is beside the point."