Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Justice Department Appeals Time Warner-AT&T Merger Approval (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the it's-not-over-yet dept.

The Justice Department will appeal the AT&T-Time Warner merger approval, according to a court document filed Thursday. In one of the largest U.S. antitrust cases in decades, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled last month that the merger could go on despite the government's resistance. The feds did not seek a stay that would have prevented the merger from taking place, and AT&T and Time Warner closed the deal directly after Leon's ruling.

27 comments

  1. New we wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...for AOL to swoop back in and buy the combined entity.

    1. Re:New we wait... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      AOL is part of Oath now (which is a Verizon company).
      So you're expecting Verizon to buy AT&T?

    2. Re:New we wait... by youngone · · Score: 2

      Verizon might buy AT&T, why not?
      Synergies or something.

    3. Re:New we wait... by Suki+I · · Score: 1

      Yes, just like back in the old days when Slashdot was warning of the AOL/Time MONOPOLY that would end humanity!

      Didn't end. Oh well.

      --
      Home of The Suki Series
    4. Re:New we wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Ma-Bell will be reassembled!!

    5. Re:New we wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When your conglomerates combine, I am Captain Monopoly!

    6. Re: New we wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well at least Ma Bell did more for r&d and scientific advancement than any of these modern "private" companies have done over the decades. Though we'd be much better off just reimposing Ma Bell style profit caps on current corporations than actually resurrecting the beast. Serves them right though, first thing they did after the merger was raise the price on DirecTV

    7. Re: New we wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This Ma Bell is not That Ma Bell. AT&T is the renamed company when Soutwestern Bell bought Cingular.

  2. Too little, too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They had their day in court. They lost (and the judge made it pretty clear that any appeal would likely fail). Time to move on.

    1. Re:Too little, too late by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, any appeal will likely bring up the fact that ATT committed perjury.

    2. Re:Too little, too late by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 3, Informative

      You mean this? AT&T Promised Lower Prices After Time Warner Merger -- It's Raising Them Instead. Is not that some sort of breach of agreement?

    3. Re: Too little, too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Raised their Admin fees. Then started talking about changing up HBO and removed Go from plans.

      Fuck them. Fry them on low power on TV.

    4. Re:Too little, too late by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That was the same problem JEDEC ran into with Rambus. According to JEDEC rules, members weren't allowed to patent the technologies being discussed. The members were laying the framework for DDR2, and Rambus simply lifted it and patented it. After a lot of court cases, the courts finally decided that Rambus had violated the terms they'd agreed to when they joined JEDEC. However, since the membership terms didn't lay out any penalties for what would happen if someone violated the rules, the only recourse JEDEC had was to kick Rambus out. Outside of JEDEC, Rambus' patents were still valid.

      If there's no guaranteed penalty for breaking a promise, the promise is worthless.

    5. Re: Too little, too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Raised their Admin fees. Then started talking about changing up HBO and removed Go from plans.

      Fuck them. Fry them on low power on TV.

      Yep, AT&T is evil. Trump is evil. Trump's desire to hurt CNN is just evil doing evil. I'd be fine with this decision being undone, though they should treat all these mergers equally, not attack some for political reasons, or attack the press for doing their jobs/etc.

    6. Re:Too little, too late by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      If there's no guaranteed penalty for breaking a promise, the promise is worthless.

      Hmm... Even though the promise is worthless, at least the merge should become invalid. Thus, TW can't be merged with AT&T. I still see that it is worth it.

    7. Re:Too little, too late by phalse+phace · · Score: 1

      You mean this? AT&T Promised Lower Prices After Time Warner Merger -- It's Raising Them Instead. Is not that some sort of breach of agreement?

      Technically, AT&T did lower prices. They now offer a streaming tv service called WatchTV that's $15 per month or free if you have an AT&T wireless unlimited plan. They didn't offer this prior to the merger.

      This was a result of the merger.

  3. Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Android pkg format will fix this for us with his hosts file.

  4. Won't happen by AlanBDee · · Score: 1

    The government argued that the deal would make the pay-TV market "less competitive and less innovative."

    I would love to see this merger undone but I'm not actually that worried about the competitive market for film and TV. AT&T has Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, and Disney/Fox to compete against. Even with the recent changes to HBO I expect that most the talent will switch to one of these other companies. Remember, after the merger, they're charging $5 more for DirectTV so that it now costs $35/mo. That's not exactly a competitive price. This merger may be just as damaging to consumers as the AOL/Time Warner merger was.

    I do worry about them prioritizing their media through their internet network. Still, i don't think an appeal will happen because the judge didn't set any conditions for them to violate.

    1. Re:Won't happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's not really much to worry about. Traditional TV providers screwed up so badly they gave birth to Netflix's new business model. (And their response to people turning up noses to 60/mo for cable was to push for 200/mo targets). There's also YouTube- A whole other form of video entertainment all together.

      ATT is buying up a bunch of entertainment properties to make the same mistakes all over again. They think they're going to have a grand old time creating all sorts of obscene bundled packages stuffed to the gills with 'value'.

      Which is exactly the opposite of what the consumer wants

    2. Re:Won't happen by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the spying on consumers.. ooops... I mean more efficiently marketing to consumers.

      --
      Cheap storage VM.
    3. Re:Won't happen by helpfulcorn · · Score: 1

      You mean you don't like a History Channel devoid of history, or Discovery channel all about ... whatever the hell they talk about now, I honestly haven't watched it in years, or the similar shift happening on the Science Channel and History Channel 2, or remember when TLC, the Learning Channel, had shit about learning, then started Trading Spaces and now it's all fat people, like looking in a mirror, but that's why I watch TV, or used to, now I just download everything selectively. It takes the fun out of discovering new programs to watch, because it's like radio now.

      Privacy aside, I imagine the reason TV channels don't truly go knee deep into seeing what people are watching is because the current ratings system makes them all look fairly OK, and if the total truth were to ever get out, some channels would be seen as essentially be devoid of watchers, and thus advertisers would stop paying.

  5. Funny thing is this will probably go to the SCOTUS by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    right as they're about to get another pro-corporate justice who's likely to side with AT&T...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  6. Re:Funny thing is this will probably go to the SCO by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

    There's a large difference between anti-trust actions and thinking the FCC has the authority to institute NN.

  7. Re:Funny thing is this will probably go to the SCO by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

    Especially since Kavanaugh's NN jursiprudence explicitly doesn't apply in areas where there is only one significant class of cable operator.

  8. Hypothetically Speaking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would happen if the appeal stuck? Is it really so simple to unwind a merger like that? Would the redivested company even resemble the original Time Warner? Or would it be gutted and auctioned off piecemeal?

  9. No, not Time Warner Cable by Megane · · Score: 1

    inb4 someone complains that AT&T now has a networks monopoly

    (This is what's left of Time Warner the media company, not Time Warner the cable company.)

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  10. Good Move! by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    This creates a monopoly and needs to be reviewed.