This Tuesday, November 5, Americans will go to the polls to elect the 47th president in the history of the United States. A vote with considerable stakes which goes far beyond the borders of the leading world power. In Silicon Valley, the tech giants are also holding their breath: the future of their regulation depends on this vote.
Many ongoing cases
Because the four years in office of the Biden administration marked a real turning point in the supervision of the country’s technological giants. The approach taken has proven to be much stricter than before, with numerous cases brought against GAFA.
In early 2023, the Department of Justice (DoJ) filed a complaint against Google, accusing it of abuse of a dominant position in the online advertising sector. A few months later, it was the turn of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to file charges against Amazon, accusing it of multiple anticompetitive practices to establish its monopoly in online commerce.
Apple has not escaped this. In March, the DoJ indicted the Apple brand, denouncing its numerous practices to maintain its position in the smartphone market. Microsoft, for its part, is the subject of a vast investigation into the artificial intelligence (AI) sector. His multibillion-dollar investment in OpenAI is under scrutiny.
But it is important to remember that Donald Trump has also adopted a more rigorous policy towards these companies. The case between Google and the Department of Justice, which the web giant has just lost, was in fact brought in 2020 at the instigation of the Republican administration. The company was even found guilty of unfair monopoly, and a dismantling of its activities is, for the moment, on the table.
Appointment of antitrust leaders
The outcome of these various cases will be known in several years, as the judicial and legislative process can last across the Atlantic. Therefore, the winner of the election will be decisive in potentially influencing the final decision. Because it is the president who appoints the heads of the country’s two antitrust regulatory bodies: the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, and the head of the antitrust division of the Department of Justice.
When he took office, Joe Biden chose Lina Khan to head the FTC. This fervent opponent of the monopolies exercised by GAFAM made herself known by publishing a thesis against Amazon. At the DOJ, Jonathan Kanter, also known for his aggressive approach towards big tech, was selected.
But then, what would be the strategy adopted by Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in the event of victory?
Two strict approaches, one more than the other
If the Democratic candidate wins the election, there is a good chance that regulatory policy will remain as is. After all, Kamala Harris was vice president all four years in office, and didn’t seem to object to the turn of events.
Note, however, that she maintains links with Silicon Valley as a former San Francisco prosecutor. They also materialized during her campaign, since she employed as her main advisor Karen Dunn, lawyer for Google, who led her defense in the recent affair relating to the advertising market. However, it is unlikely that the candidate will decide to go against the grain of her party.
The case of Donald Trump is more difficult to predict. But one thing seems to be unanimous among the American press: pro-business people should be appointed to lead the antitrust bodies. This would, among other things, lead to a more lenient approach to technology mergers and acquisitions.
Because this is one of the big changes made by Lina Khan. The FTC chair introduced new rules to review large acquisitions. So much so that the body tried to block several during its mandate, like that of Activision Blizzard by Microsoft. It has failed repeatedly, but it speaks to Democrats’ determination to no longer let corporations do as they please.
An election of Donald Trump would not mean any respite. The former president has already been very critical of technology giants, particularly Google and Meta, because he considers that these platforms are censoring him. A few days ago, he even threatened the Mountain View firm, accusing it of bias.
The fact that many prominent players in Silicon Valley, such as Elon Musk or the founders of the powerful venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, have given their support to Donald Trump, nevertheless suggests that regulation will be much looser.
Other scenarios to consider
Whether one or the other wins, it is not guaranteed that it will be able to apply its policy in full. Indeed, to govern according to one’s ambitions, it is crucial to have a parliamentary majority in Congress, both in the Senate and in the House of Representatives, which is far from guaranteed.
For two years, Joe Biden had to deal with a House of Representatives with a Republican majority, significantly limiting his ability to act. Since the adoption of a law requires consensus between the three parties, political deadlocks become inevitable. For example, the appointment of replacements for Lina Khan and Jonathan Kanter in the event of Donald Trump’s victory would be tempered by a Democratic Senate or House.
Despite everything, it is unlikely that the ongoing cases against GAFAM will be abandoned. On the other hand, corrective measures could differ greatly depending on which party is in power. Distrust of the AI sector could increase in both scenarios as the technology gains importance.
One thing seems certain: the era of wild west » technology is coming to an end. Tech giants face an increasingly complex and restrictive regulatory environment. Although one outcome looks more favorable than the other, the time is no longer for transgression, but for adaptation.
