phone company in america in 1956 and the government sued them under the antitrust laws and basically you have to surrender all of your ip, intellectual property to anybody and you have to license it to any other company from bell labs in order to stay in monopoly. what happened was they happen to have the transistor and the laser and a semi conductor, the satellite, basically all the basic parts of the digital economy and they licensed it for free and that created texas instruments, motorola, intel, comes that. steve: what is the parallel today? first, the step is google could license his intellectual properties and instead of suing over other companies over autonomous car patents maybe they should have to give away
their search patterns and their autonomous car patents and all the tens of thousands but i think there s -. steve: is that a version of what people say they would regulate in a utility. yes, that is one way to look at it. there are other similar ways to go about this. you re mentioned the facebook ad thing. why shouldn t facebook and google have to disclose who bought the ads, the dark post ads on their services. that is what you have to do on tv when someone puts an ad on fox. they have to say who paid for it. you never have to say that. steve: so that gets into the russian election argument but it doesn t get to the dominance. on the dominant argument one really clear thing that might need to happen which is maybe these companies have to be split up. facebook just like we have to
their search patterns and their autonomous car patents and all the tens of thousands but i think there s -. steve: is that a version of what people say they would regulate in a utility. yes, that is one way to look at it. there are other similar ways to go about this. you re mentioned the facebook ad thing. why shouldn t facebook and google have to disclose who bought the ads, the dark post ads on their services. that is what you have to do on tv when someone puts an ad on fox. they have to say who paid for it. you never have to say that. steve: so that gets into the russian election argument but it doesn t get to the dominance. on the dominant argument one really clear thing that might need to happen which is maybe these companies have to be split up. facebook just like we have to
their search patterns and their autonomous car patents and all the tens of thousands but i think there s -. steve: is that a version of what people say they would regulate in a utility. yes, that is one way to look at it. there are other similar ways to go about this. you re mentioned the facebook ad thing. why shouldn t facebook and google have to disclose who bought the ads, the dark post ads on their services. that is what you have to do on tv when someone puts an ad on fox. they have to say who paid for it. you never have to say that. steve: so that gets into the russian election argument but it doesn t get to the dominance. on the dominant argument one really clear thing that might need to happen which is maybe these companies have to be split
phone company in america in 1956 and the government sued them under the antitrust laws and basically you have to surrender all of your ip, intellectual property to anybody and you have to license it to any other company from bell labs in order to stay in monopoly. what happened was they happen to have the transistor and the laser and a semi conductor, the satellite, basically all the basic parts of the digital economy and they licensed it for free and that created texas instruments, motorola, intel, comes that. steve: what is the parallel today? first, the step is google could license his intellectual properties and instead of suing over other companies over autonomous car patents maybe they should have to give away