Portions of the filing are redacted, but it goes on like that. The FTC’s actual claim is that it is reasonably probable that the combined firm will have the ability and incentive to harm competition, including from future competitors, in several ways in multiple markets where competitive effects of this transaction will be felt, including consoles, content subscription, and cloud gaming services. Defendants assert that the “FTC’s central claim is that the combined firm would withhold certain Activision content - in particular COD - from Sony.” But that is a strawman. but the law, as this Court already ruled, is that the FTC need only present “evidence sufficient to raise serious, substantial, difficult questions regarding the anticompetitive effects” of Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision. Defendants assert that the upcoming hearing must decide the merits of their deal, lest they be forced to renegotiate their self-imposed July 18 deadline for completing the transaction. A sample from the opening includes:ĭefendants’ arguments might be persuasive if they were aimed at the applicable law, the FTC’s actual claims, and the record of evidence. I will embed the FTC’s response below so you can read the entire thing, but the regulator is explicit in eviscerating Microsoft’s motion. The first trial date in the case is upcoming and Microsoft filed an opposition to the preliminary injunction barring the deal, arguing against all manner of items in the FTC’s suit. In the ongoing drama that is Microsoft’s attempted purchase of Activision, the FTC filed for a temporary restraining order barring the consummation of the purchase while its lawsuit remains unresolved. Or potential consequences, at least, in the case of Microsoft battling with the FTC. Thu, Jun 22nd 2023 08:01pm - Timothy GeignerĪctions, as they say, have consequences.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |