Europe has the potential to dramatically improve the productivity of it communications infrastructure and allow the market to better serve citizens’ needs.

While ITIF applauds the Commission for its efforts to evaluate the adequacy of California’s competition laws and consider possible changes, this comment highlights concerns with both the Technology Platform and Mergers and Acquisitions Reports, specifically regarding their respective legal and economic findings from the standpoint of promoting innovation.

Proposed changes to Kenya’s competition regime will hinder, not help its digital economy. Rather than impose substantial changes based on the false premise that digital markets require special treatment, Kenya should use existing enforcement tools to police its growing digital markets.

There is no free lunch to be found by imposing base contributions on foreign online undertakings to fund the government’s preferred content. The Commission should reckon with the economic realities of its proposal rather than obscuring them behind anti-foreign rhetoric.

Ex-ante regulation is not only unnecessary in view of Turkey’s growing digital markets, but likely to chill the very innovation it seeks to promote. Through a number of per se bans for behavior that is very often pro-competitive, consumers will be harmed—a fact that is already happening in Europe with its own DMA.

Rather than allow India’s dynamic high-tech and startup ecosystem to continue to flourish, the Draft Digital Competition Bill follows the path of overbearing competition policy taken by the EU, which lacks any leading digital firms. India should instead privilege the U.S. model of markets and dynamism.

Regulation in the digital sector should only be necessary to remedy market failure that cannot be addressed by the current legal framework, which simply is not true.

Given that the Microsoft-Mistral AI partnership does not create a relevant merger situation, does not harm competition, and has a pro-competitive impact on the market, the CMA should not intervene.

Given that the Amazon-Anthropic partnership does not create a relevant merger situation, does not harm competition, and has a pro-competitive impact on the market, the CMA should not intervene.

Given that Microsoft’s non-exclusive licensing of Inflection AI’s model and its hiring of former Inflection AI employees does not create a relevant merger situation, does not harm competition, and has a pro-competitive impact on the market, the CMA should not intervene.