Interview with Rep. Cicilline on his bipartisan package taking on Big Tech, Apple's DOJ subpoena, Facebook's platform lock-in, and acquisition and merger reform
Representative David Cicilline's bipartisan package takes aim at tech companies and would be the biggest antitrust reform in decades.
New York TimesKara Swisher
Context & Ripple Effects
Cicilline’s position has hardened through the House’s Big Tech scrutiny: he previously described Apple’s App Store conduct as monopolistic and argued that Facebook should be broken up over its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions. The new package turns that earlier investigative agenda into a bipartisan legislative push.
The package arrives alongside a DOJ subpoena to Apple and renewed focus on Facebook’s platform lock-in, connecting conduct by individual platforms to proposed changes in merger enforcement.
First-order effects
Apple faces parallel pressure from the DOJ subpoena and a congressional package aimed at Big Tech’s market power, while Facebook’s lock-in practices are placed at the center of the legislative debate.
Cicilline’s proposal makes acquisition and merger reform an explicit target, extending the House inquiry’s scrutiny of Facebook’s Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions into prospective antitrust rules.
Second-order effects
Big Tech companies pursuing acquisitions would have to plan around a more restrictive congressional framework if Cicilline’s package advances, rather than treating merger review as separate from platform-conduct scrutiny.
Apple’s App Store practices, previously characterized by Cicilline as monopolistic conduct and excessive fees, gain added relevance as lawmakers connect platform control with antitrust reform.
Third-order effects
If the bipartisan package becomes a legislative template, U.S. antitrust policy would shift from case-by-case investigation toward rules designed specifically for dominant digital platforms and their acquisition strategies.
The combined attention to platform lock-in, app-distribution control, and acquisitions points toward governance that evaluates Big Tech’s ecosystem power rather than isolated transactions alone.
The trend: U.S. lawmakers are moving from congressional investigation of Big Tech toward platform-specific antitrust rules covering conduct, distribution control, and acquisitions.
I'm told the House Judiciary markup of the five new antitrust bills is next Weds June 23 at 10 am 🚨
@kantrowitz
Alex Kantrowitz on x
When writing antitrust legislation, you want to fire precision missiles and not dumb rockets that will destroy the market. The bill preventing Big Tech companies from acquiring startups is a dumb rocket. Read more here on @BigTechnology: https://bigtechnology.substack.com/ ...
@sarthakgh
Sar Haribhakti on x
“With the Big Tech escape route closed off, some startups might successfully push toward an IPO. But others would either settle for worse deals from smaller companies or implode completely, altering the calculus of whether it's worth founding a startup in the first place.” https:…
@benedictevans
Benedict Evans on x
@GiladEdelman @lutherlowe @davidcicilline The problem is that the way the bill is written it doesn't just ban Google Maps or Apple Music (if anyone genuinely believes those should be banned) - it covers literally everything on the device
@benedictevans
Benedict Evans on x
@lapcatsoftware @davemark The text says that Apple/Google cannot have a ‘line of business’ that ‘provides services’ on iPhone/Android. On a broad reading, that bans Gmail, Youtube and Games on Android. On a narrow reading, it also bans any app at all.
@migueldeicaza
Miguel de Icaza on x
I have a proposal: we do some A/B testing. EU customers get iPhone with side loading, multiple AppStore, unlimited apps, full JIT compilation and Americans keep the locked and secured iPhones, and we look back in a year and see which one is best. https://apple.news/...
@sally_hubbard
Sally Hubbard on x
Don't listen to propaganda from big tech front groups (or tech journos who spout their talking points). They're not on your side. @davidcicilline is. https://twitter.com/...
@greg_speicher
Greg Speicher on x
@karaswisher @davidcicilline @RepKenBuck @nytopinion There are clearly legitimate concerns with the platform companies but some of these bills lack nuance and fail to consider the potentially massive unintended consequences of these actions. A lot more debate is needed to get thi…
@greg_speicher
Greg Speicher on x
@karaswisher @davidcicilline @RepKenBuck @nytopinion Interestingly these bills have Republican support but the bills proposed have nothing directly to do with Republican concerns over the platforms' alleged censorship and bias. Republican support for these bills is puzzling.
@stevesi
Steven Sinofsky on x
A funny thing about this was how Apple including pages, numbers, keynote *pushed*'competition towards the dominant incumbent productivity suite. https://twitter.com/...
@karaswisher
Kara Swisher on x
Here is my Sway interview with @davidcicilline, who is working with the GOP's @RepKenBuck on a raft of bills to rein in big tech. Will it work? @NYTOpinion https://www.nytimes.com/...
@repkenbuck
Rep. Ken Buck on x
Big Government allowed Big Tech to become monopolists. Big Tech is lobbying against my antitrust reforms. Republicans shouldn't side with them. Rein in Big Tech now.
@tomcottonar
Tom Cotton on x
I see that @Apple is taking a break from lobbying against anti-slavery bills to instead lobby against antitrust reform legislation. https://twitter.com/...
@politico
@politico on x
An antitrust package is pitting the politically powerful Koch network, which advocates for the government to stay out of business, against major tech antagonists on the right https://www.politico.com/...
@ggreenwald
Glenn Greenwald on x
Every day, Silicon Valley monopolies — almost always consistent with the views and decrees of the federal government and the Party that controls it — censors the internet a little more and a little more, and everyday the liberal-left becomes more content, even happy, about it: ht…
@repkenbuck
Rep. Ken Buck on x
Big Government created Big Tech monopolists through antitrust amnesty. We need to break them up.
@kantrowitz
Alex Kantrowitz on x
@scottros @kimmaicutler @BigTechnology Good point! I think my analogy is clunkier than I expected. Perhaps these all should've been dumber, or not written at all.
@matthewstoller
Matt Stoller on x
Tom Cotton voted no on confirming Lina Khan as an FTC Commissioner. I don't assume Cotton is insincere in his critiques of big tech, but that vote on Khan was something of a red flag. https://twitter.com/...
@birnbaum_e
Emily Birnbaum on x
NEW: The Koch network is mobilizing to defend Big Tech — but will it matter? Some say the Kochs have “zero influence” right now. “Most House Judiciary members and their staff couldn't pick out their people from a police lineup,” said one GOP aide. https://www.politico.com/...
@scottros
Scott Rosenberg on x
@Kantrowitz @kimmaicutler @BigTechnology Actually, the legislation should be written broadly and clearly to establish principles that will outlast the moment. “Precision targeting” of specific companies is a sure way to end up with unintended consequences, as your piece indicates
@ppatel
Pratik Patel on x
Tactically, having five bills introduced at once most probably means that they know not every proposal will go far. Congress wants to stop most Big Tech acquisitions. But that won't necessarily increase competition. https://bigtechnology.substack.com/ ...
@repkenbuck
Rep. Ken Buck on x
🚨 A majority of voters (Republican and Democrat) support breaking up Big Tech's monopoly power. That's exactly what my bipartisan antitrust bills do. https://www.axios.com/...
@kantrowitz
Alex Kantrowitz on x
Trying to outlaw nearly all Big Tech acquisitions while funding the regulators tasked with evaluating those deals is... just kind of bizarre. My latest in @BigTechnology on the @RepJeffries bill and its consequences. https://bigtechnology.substack.com/ ...