I don't think there is. They can ban whatever ads they want, they don't have to do business with crypto companies if they don't want to. It's their right as a private enterprise. (Speaking for every one of them)
Actually, you'll find that corporations have no rights at all (check the Bill of Rights).
They are creations of law and subject to law. And the law says they can't make contracts with competitors to restrict supply of services - that's an illegal cartel! But that's exactly what they did.
The law also limits the rights of firms with substantial market power. They can't do things which harm competition - but that's exactly what they did.
But what would I know? I'm only a lawyer with over 25 years of experience as counsel in the technology sector.
I was dealing with these sorts of issues for major telecoms companies when Mark Zuckerberg was in elementary school!
Odds of any court or judge siding with you on these views are negligible at best. By the way how exactly did Facebook make "a contract with competitors to restrict supply of services"?
Beyond all that, even if you could prove they did some of what you say, you can't possibly quantify how much it actually impacted the price. That is impossible to say.
Hi @jrcornel, I have great respect for your opinion on Crypto. But the prospects of legal success of Australian competition law class actions is my area of expertise.
We also have advice from external Counsel confirming the legal theory and the evidence is all obvious stuff (Like Facebook being competitive with Crypto projects like Steem)
I'm happy to answer your particular questions or concerns about the case.
I’m happy to share more technical details of the case privately. I’m on Discord as @apshamilton
You can also check out @jpbliberty on Steem. There are a number of posts dealing with the impact of the ad ban on the market. Hundreds of Shareholder class actions have settled for large sums on far less clear correlation and scale of market impact.
I was also sceptical at first because the scale of what Andrew is talking about seems a bit crazy. I initially interviewed Andrew and looked at the Australian law he's talking about and was gradually convinced there was something here.
And that was all before Facebook launched into the world a financial product that anyone else would have been BANNED from advertising on Facebook before May of this year! And it is clear now (even though the case doesn't rest on this at all) Facebook started working on Libra at or around the same time they instituted a ban on all similar competitive products!
America doesn't have strong consumer protection laws against monopolies, cases are insanely difficult to bring and win, but America isn't the world and as Facebook makes clear in its Marxist Libra manifesto, their new crypto currency is a global product to take over the world!
It was illegal cartel conduct - a breach of Australia’s Competition Law. See https://www.jpbliberty.com/crypto-ad-ban-case for more details. There is a strong legal claim.
Posted using Partiko iOS
I don't think there is. They can ban whatever ads they want, they don't have to do business with crypto companies if they don't want to. It's their right as a private enterprise. (Speaking for every one of them)
Actually, you'll find that corporations have no rights at all (check the Bill of Rights).
They are creations of law and subject to law. And the law says they can't make contracts with competitors to restrict supply of services - that's an illegal cartel! But that's exactly what they did.
The law also limits the rights of firms with substantial market power. They can't do things which harm competition - but that's exactly what they did.
But what would I know? I'm only a lawyer with over 25 years of experience as counsel in the technology sector.
I was dealing with these sorts of issues for major telecoms companies when Mark Zuckerberg was in elementary school!
Odds of any court or judge siding with you on these views are negligible at best. By the way how exactly did Facebook make "a contract with competitors to restrict supply of services"?
Beyond all that, even if you could prove they did some of what you say, you can't possibly quantify how much it actually impacted the price. That is impossible to say.
Hi @jrcornel, I have great respect for your opinion on Crypto. But the prospects of legal success of Australian competition law class actions is my area of expertise.
We also have advice from external Counsel confirming the legal theory and the evidence is all obvious stuff (Like Facebook being competitive with Crypto projects like Steem)
I'm happy to answer your particular questions or concerns about the case.
I’m happy to share more technical details of the case privately. I’m on Discord as @apshamilton
You can also check out @jpbliberty on Steem. There are a number of posts dealing with the impact of the ad ban on the market. Hundreds of Shareholder class actions have settled for large sums on far less clear correlation and scale of market impact.
You make a good point. I will look into this a bit further.
I was also sceptical at first because the scale of what Andrew is talking about seems a bit crazy. I initially interviewed Andrew and looked at the Australian law he's talking about and was gradually convinced there was something here.
And that was all before Facebook launched into the world a financial product that anyone else would have been BANNED from advertising on Facebook before May of this year! And it is clear now (even though the case doesn't rest on this at all) Facebook started working on Libra at or around the same time they instituted a ban on all similar competitive products!
America doesn't have strong consumer protection laws against monopolies, cases are insanely difficult to bring and win, but America isn't the world and as Facebook makes clear in its Marxist Libra manifesto, their new crypto currency is a global product to take over the world!
I see. I will look into this a bit more, thanks for your input.