The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the meta between the Antitröst case aroused missing rejection documents, echoing the world of technology. When the censorships in the documents submitted to the court were insufficient, Apple, Google and Snap representatives made serious objections. Company lawyers, meta’s preparation of documents in the preparation of the diligence is unacceptable, he said. In particular, the lawyers of Apple and Snap described this as a “grave mistake ..
With the exposure of this incident, it was clearly seen that confidence in Meta was shaken. Apple’s lawyer implied that the company will reconsider the company’s secret information sharing with Meta. The Google Front accused Meta directly and argued that the mistake made his own data at risk. All these statements came up with the information conveyed by The Verge reporter Lauren Feiner, who was displaced by the hearing.
Meta revealed in -house analysis of competitors
The Snap side showed his reaction to the situation with much harder expressions. The company’s lawyer said that Meta’s “reckless and sloppy” attitude has made it difficult for companies that are not subject to the case. Snap’s lawyer said he would not behave with the same indifference if Meta had seen a similar information as belonging to his own company. These words were carefully noted in the courtroom.
Mark Hansen, Meta’s chief lawyer, suggested that a neutral third party should censor the documents for the solution of the problem. However, this suggestion was not enough to compensate for the situation. In particular, Snap’s complaints that some of the information mentioned in his opening speech are still valid. Although the SNAP does not clearly specify which information is hidden, it is determined that Meta does not pay attention to the borders.
Hansen argued that any secret information was not revealed in the opening speeches. It was clearly understood from the statements of the lawyer that Snap did not participate in this assessment. On the other hand, Hansen shared the reason for not telling Snap in advance that this information would be shared. He said that SNAP was in cooperation with FTC and that Meta is a direct rival.
The information in the documents includes in -house analyzes, although not very striking. For example, iPhone users prefer Apple’s own messaging application to Meta or Snap. In another slide, there is an assessment of Snapchat’s situation in 2020. Tiktok and Meta’s applications come to the fore in this period.
The main issue here is about the way of sharing rather than the content of the information. Snap and other companies argue that the documents should be kept safely instead of sharing with the public. Snap’s lawyer explicitly accused Meta’s chief lawyer, accusing competition analyzes in a way that everyone could see. This claim, which was expressed in the courtroom, further stretched the relations between companies.
Meta’s approach to information sharing has been criticized before. However, this last event caused the company to be questioned by wider sections of data security. The fact that giants such as Apple, Google and Snap express similar objections at the same hearing may be a remarkable breaking point in terms of commodity. Especially in the titles such as confidentiality and competition, a more sensitive process will be expected to be carried out.