WHAT IS THE

CASE FOR

THE DIGITAL

PLATFORM ACT?

The Case for the Digital Platform Act is a new e-book from Harold Feld, Senior Vice President of Public Knowledge and longtime communications industry advocate, in collaboration with Public Knowledge and the Roosevelt Institute.

The e-book aims to guide policymakers on what government can do to preserve competition and empower individual users in the huge swath of our economy now referred to as “Big Tech.” It is a deep-dive on how to address the challenges posed by the power of digital platforms.

DOWNLOAD & DONATE

Full E-Book (pdf) Full E-Book (epub) Full E-Book (mobi) Executive Summary Foreward by Tom Wheeler

Typically, a book like this would retail for between $10-$20. If you support Public Knowledge’s work, and want to see us do more, please make a donation “purchase” of $15, or whatever amount you feel is appropriate. Thank you.

Donate DOWNLOAD BY CHAPTER

Foreward

Executive Summary 

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter 1: Defining Digital Platforms

Chapter 2: Sector-Specific Regulation 

Chapter 3: Lessons From History

Chapter 4: DPA Structure and Content

Chapter 5: Censorship & Content Moderation  

Chapter 6: Promoting ‘Good’ Content

Chapter 7: Consumer Protection

Chapter 8: Federal Oversight Agency 

Conclusion

Bibliography/References

MORE ABOUT THE DIGITAL PLATFORM ACT

DEFINING DIGITAL PLATFORMS

The Case for the Digital Platform Act defines “digital platform” as a service that:

1. Is accessed via the internet;
2. Is at the center of a two-sided or multi-sided market where at least one side is open to the general public and allows the public to play multiple roles;
3. Enjoys specific types of powerful network effects.

APPOINTING AN AGENCY TO GOVERN PLATFORM REGULATION

The Case for the Digital Platform Act proposes an agency specifically charged to regulate digital platforms on an ongoing basis. An expert agency over digital platforms can analyze and study the market to determine when regulation or enforcements are needed, including if:

• Dominant digital platforms should be required to offer interconnection to competitors through open APIs to break down network effects that lock in users.
• Dominant digital platforms should be prohibited from self-preferencing and some types of discrimination. An agency can monitor and enforce this through “black-box testing,” protecting details of proprietary algorithms.
• There should be restrictions on acquisitions by dominant digital platforms, including non-horizontal acquisitions usually less scrutinized by antitrust agencies.
• Certain platforms that collect data from competitors (or potential competitors defined broadly) should be limited in how they can use their competitor’s data.

MEASURING DOMINANCE TO PROMOTE COMPETITION

Because digital platforms often challenge traditional concepts of antitrust markets and traditional metrics of market power, The Case for the Digital Platform Act proposes a new metric, the “cost of exclusion” (CoE). Recognizing that the power of digital platforms derives from the powerful network effects possible with flexible, multi-sided markets, CoE measures the cost to an individual or business based on exclusion from the platform. This measure is designed to be flexible enough to apply both to the economic cost of exclusion and to the cost to individuals from being excluded from platforms increasingly central to civic discourse and the public sphere.

DEFINING DIGITAL PLATFORMS

The Case for the Digital Platform Act defines “digital platform” as a service that:

1. Is accessed via the internet;
2. Is at the center of a two-sided or multi-sided market where at least one side is open to the general public and allows the public to play multiple roles;
3. Enjoys specific types of powerful network effects.

APPOINTING AN AGENCY TO GOVERN PLATFORM REGULATION

The Case for the Digital Platform Act proposes an agency specifically charged to regulate digital platforms on an ongoing basis. An expert agency over digital platforms can analyze and study the market to determine when regulation or enforcements are needed, including if:

• Dominant digital platforms should be required to offer interconnection to competitors through open APIs to break down network effects that lock in users.
• Dominant digital platforms should be prohibited from self-preferencing and some types of discrimination. An agency can monitor and enforce this through “black-box testing,” protecting details of proprietary algorithms.
• There should be restrictions on acquisitions by dominant digital platforms, including non-horizontal acquisitions usually less scrutinized by antitrust agencies.
• Certain platforms that collect data from competitors (or potential competitors defined broadly) should be limited in how they can use their competitor’s data.

MEASURING DOMINANCE TO PROMOTE COMPETITION

Because digital platforms often challenge traditional concepts of antitrust markets and traditional metrics of market power, The Case for the Digital Platform Act proposes a new metric, the “cost of exclusion” (CoE). Recognizing that the power of digital platforms derives from the powerful network effects possible with flexible, multi-sided markets, CoE measures the cost to an individual or business based on exclusion from the platform. This measure is designed to be flexible enough to apply both to the economic cost of exclusion and to the cost to individuals from being excluded from platforms increasingly central to civic discourse and the public sphere.

PRAISE FOR “THE CASE FOR THE DIGITAL PLATFORM ACT”

“[…] a tour de force of the issues raised by the digital economy and internet capitalism. Whether you agree or disagree with Harold, these thoughts will stretch your intellect and stimulate your thinking.” –Tom Wheeler, Former Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Visiting Fellow at The Brooking Institution

“You’d be shortchanging yourself by not reading the book of such a principled advocate.” –Hal Singer, Managing Director at Econ One Research, Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business, Senior Fellow at George Washington’s Institute of Public Policy

“I’d bet you can’t listen to Harold Feld talk about the Digital Platform Act and not think we need it as law right now. I’m glad Harold Feld and Public Knowledge are making the case for government to do the job Silicon Valley won’t.” -Chris Savage, Eclectablog

About Public Knowledge

Public Knowledge is a 501(c)(3) organization promoting freedom of expression, an open internet, and access to affordable communications tools and creative works. Public Knowledge works at the intersection of copyright, telecommunications, and internet law, advocating for policies that serve the public interest. Learn more at publicknowledge.org and contact us at pk@publicknowledge.org

About the Author

Harold Feld is Public Knowledge’s Senior Vice President. Before Public Knowledge, Harold worked as Senior Vice President of Media Access Project, advocating for the public interest in media, telecommunications, and technology policy for almost 10 years. Prior to MAP, Harold worked on the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, and accountability issues at the Department of Energy, to name a few.