Jack Nicastro

Developing common AI safety standards does not, by itself, undermine competition. Policymakers should not force companies to choose between competing vigorously and working together to prevent serious safety risks. Antitrust law should allow both.

The Proposed Amendment would have the effect of “protecting” startups by frustrating larger firms from acquiring their founders and employees. Adopting such a policy would predictably chill incentives to innovate.

ITIF applauds the Ministry for removing much of the digital-platform specific language from the earlier version of the Draft Law, but remains concerned that what remains in the proposed amendments, especially to Articles 26 and 27, may result in de facto discrimination against digital platforms.

Antitrust battles over digital markets have spread well beyond Big Tech to other leading online firms, threatening productivity and dynamism across the digital economy.

To avoid a potentially exorbitant Digital Markets Act fine, Google is changing its spam policy in a way that may degrade Search, providing yet another example of the European Commission compelling American firms to weaken their services.

AI companies’ destructive book scanning neither forecloses competition nor threatens humanity’s cultural inheritance. The FTC should not waste resources investigating it.

Rather than resort to heavy-handed content and price regulation to address nonexistent market failures, the CMA should follow the lead of the United States and rely on a tried-and-true, ex post law enforcement framework to address concerns about anticompetitive behavior associated with anti-steering practices by Apple and Google.

The App Store Freedom Act would impede innovation, weaken U.S. technological leadership, and import a hostile antitrust framework used abroad to discriminate against American technology companies.

Innovation not only gives rise to market power, but market power fosters innovation by enabling and incentivizing the firms that possess it to make the investments innovation requires.

The Draft Law is contrary to Vietnam’s goals of both fostering homegrown innovation and deepening its techno-economic partnership with the United States.

The recently reintroduced American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA) is a departure from America’s current antitrust regime, not an improvement. Although it promises to deliver innovation and choice in the technology sector, AICOA would undermine both.

The survival of the Federal Trade Commission’s specious consumer protection claims against Uber over the rideshare company’s popular subscription service perpetuates yet another flawed lawsuit against Big Tech.

Join ITIF for a panel discussion with international experts on a forthcoming report analyzing a decade of previously uncompiled KFTC enforcement data, what its findings mean for U.S.–Korea economic relations, and how policymakers in both countries should respond.

Watch now for a webinar featuring leading experts who examined the legislation, discussed its likely consequences, and explained why AICOA could undermine American technology leadership without delivering meaningful benefits for competition.

Watch now for a panel discussion with top experts as they discuss tech-specific antitrust bills mirroring the EU’s Digital Markets Act, the implications of those bills for competition in the United States, and their potential effects on America’s leading tech firms, innovation, and consumers.