Bam. Facebook just filed its brief for Nov 6th SCOTUS hearing. As much as you may think you know the cover-up, you really should read. I will link to Facebook's petition (and response when filed) along with the actual complaint moving fwd in 9th circuit. But two things. /1
First, if Justice Kavanaugh doesn't recuse then I argue it's the biggest conflict of interest by SCOTUS this year considering he's best friends and reportedly roomed at home of Facebook's top policy exec - Joel Kaplan, in middle of scandal - during confirmation hearings. /2
It's good the complaint captures nuanced items like Facebook hiring one of the two co-founders of GSR (the other they made the fall guy) after they found out their data was being sold but before the public knew it. We knew this, but most press missed on it in the noise. /3
But it also picks up on new items like Katie Harbath (mentioned 60+ times in the complaint) appears to be "M" and "N" in the Facebook message thread revealing they knew about issues with the company back in 2015. /4
They also capture the deceptive label of "certification" applied by Facebook and Zuckerberg during press statements and testimony despite knowing it was legally dubious cover-up material. And that Andy Stone was reportedly the spokesperson helping bury this. /5
However, despite my following near every detail, they also found new items like Kogan had TWO agreements with Facebook to delete data. One was dated a day after Brexit vote (so likely signed under pressure) but I was unaware it came after a Sandberg/Kaplan meeting in DC. /6
Ultimately, it's a securities case getting at when Facebook knew risks and how it chose to (not) disclose them. But underlying evidence strikes at heart of governance, prior testimony and a huge derivative lawsuit in Delaware. If Facebook fails to get SCOTUS to kill it. /7
Here is a link to the actual full complaint. You may be surprised at how much has been recorded into history wrong. Even the simple idea that Facebook data was actually sold. /8 supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/2…
And here is a link to Facebook's brief to SCOTUS. It's led by Gibson Dunn (Lipshutz is big gun. GD was involved in "audit" - scandal clean up with FTI and Stroz Friedberg. Also sanctioned for burying and delaying related evidence in the mdl lawsuit). /9 supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/2…
This thread will take you into the original cert request and various documents from the lawsuits and history of the case (for those interested). Back to Google antitrust now ;) /10
Saturday’s “No Kings” protests have filled front pages across America with impactful visuals and headlines of peaceful protests. Many included the eye popping NYC Times Square shot. Here in the Dothan Eagle (Alabama). But everyone turned out. See Montana in its Missoulian. /1
Plenty of big city energy from St. Louis, Missouri to Chicago, Illinois. /2
Midwest with Cleveland, Ohio to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. /3
US v Google remedies: Nothing groundbreaking from return of DOJ’s star economist this morning. Court tested if his concerns over solely behavioral remedies assume distrust in Google (won’t follow court orders). I don’t think it mattered relative to where we were last night... /1
Yes, some will read as leaning against structural-remedy interest. I took it simply her clarifying she doesn’t need to lean on distrust if structural is shown tech feasible. Although witness pointed out distrust harms competition investment levels. /2
Court also very much nodded head when witness Lee explained why he didn’t do “but for” analysis to a dollar amount. Mehta also determined in search it was infeasible and unnecessary so cross that out of Google’s defense imho. /3
ok, this is HUGE. Late Friday, Penske (PMC) filed a wicked-smart, landmark antitrust lawsuit against Google. I've now read it in full and I'm very impressed. Importantly, it's the first antitrust suit for Google tying its AI-driven products to its adjudicated search monopoly. /1
The core claim: Google is abusing its search monopoly to force pubs to hand over content - not just for traditional search indexing but to feed its AI. Google then repurposes it to substitute them with its own services breaking the fundamental bargain of the open web. /2
Penske says this is not a fair exchange. If it weren't for Google's adjudicated monopoly power (recall Judge Mehta said they get 19x as many queries as next biggest), Google would be paying pubs for these rights or if it didn't then they would opt-out of providing them. /3
OK all ye people depressed Judge Mehta didn't order Google broken into bits this week. I'm here to cheer you up. DOJ has its other remedies trial in 16 days and just posted its PFJ (Proposed Final Remedies) now 60+ pages of brilliant detail. Let me walk you through key terms. /1
This is the 2023 US v Google adtech win - the one DCN and its premium publishers have long been much more deep and focused on. Here’s what it means for publishers of all types - and why it will be a massive win for the open web if Judge Brinkema signs on (I believe she will). /2
First, clear structural remedies. Google must divest AdX, its ad exchange, w/in 2yrs and likely DFP, its publisher ad server. No more vertical ad stack monopoly with interest conflicts. This would finally decouple tools Google can use to rig auctions and suppress pub revenues. /3
All eyes at Google on streaming NFL game tonight but Google Inc and its many monopolies have had quite the week. I’ve been absorbing on this end, some quick Friday thoughts on things missed. Bad news certainly for the public, and also DCN members, in US v Google Search case. /1
Judge Mehta said "no thanks" to helping publishers - because he said no pubs testified. Maybe that’s what retaliation fear looks like??? He also noted the unlawful conduct was about distribution deals, not deals with publishers. More on that in a minute. /2
Despite Mehta finding Google illegally maintained its 95%+ search monopoly with browser deals, he also said it’s OK for Google to keep owning Chrome - the world’s biggest browser - so they can keep paying everyone else and free riding on their own browser. All bad here. /3
Woah. Facebook just settled immediately before board members Andreessen, Thiel, Zuckerberg, Desmond-Hellman, and Sheryl Sandberg were set to testify as to who knew what and when…depriving public of any accountability and facts in courtroom from board and officer comms. 1/3
Counter to Facebook lawyers framing yesterday, the DC AG suit isn’t dead (awaiting DC Circuit from 1/30 hearing), and NdCal shareholder suit also still alive. This is the closest to
Courtroom testimony after about $8B+ in settlements. 2/3
Credit to Reuters, Delaware Online who I saw actually showed up to cover. It’s likely why Facebook, Zuckerberg and its board, let this one get so close. But the grid. But today things were likely to get very very hot. 3/3