What Speaker Pelosi said to Tim Apple (video)

From CNBC’s “Nancy Pelosi details conversation with Apple CEO Tim Cook on antitrust bills” posted Friday:

CNBC’s Ylan Mui reports on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s conversation with Apple CEO Tim Cook over Big Tech antitrust legislation pending in Congress.

My take: If the Speaker of the House’s primary concerns are Americans’ privacy and data and tech industry consolidation, Apple has little to fear from Nancy Pelosi.

See also: Tim Cook called Nancy Pelosi to warn her against disrupting the iPhone with impending antitrust bills

13 Comments

  1. Aaron Belich said:
    “Tim Apple” is reserved for the lunacy of the former President. I have no desire to see it reused anywhere else.

    That said, Tim and the rest of Apple need to maintain their focus on keeping their customers happy.

    10
    June 27, 2021
  2. Ken Cheng said:
    To be fair, Pelosi reps the SF county district, which might lend a more sympathetic ear to the issues facing Big Tech.

    5
    June 27, 2021
    • David Emery said:
      Something about ‘hand that feeds you’ 🙂

      I’m no fan of Pelosi, but I agree that privacy should be the first priority in tech regulation.

      6
      June 27, 2021
  3. Fred Stein said:
    We already have a legal construct called the attractive nuisance doctrine. (See wikipedia for overview. IANAL.)

    From wikipedia: “The doctrine is designed to protect children who are unable to appreciate the risk posed by the object, by imposing a liability on the landowner.”

    We should apply this to platforms like FB, expanding landowner to platform owner.

    In STARK contrast, Apple takes its platform responsibility seriously, making a walled garden. Thus it is NOT open to any and all for no fee. This impacts competition, but only in a fair and safe way.

    2
    June 27, 2021
  4. Joe Murphy said:
    Aaron @ “reserved for the lunacy of the former President.”

    Which one (of our former presidents) is an appropriate response.

    Why is it some of us simply refuse to respect PED’s “No political statements” request?

    It’s not for a lack of ammunition. Or a lack or desire to engage.

    3
    June 27, 2021
    • Aaron Belich said:
      @Joe Murphy, it applies to only one, the one that uttered it.

      Regardless, if PED cares to continue to use the moniker “Tim Apple”, he invites everything that comes with it. I prefer he didn’t use it, given the political and divisive rhetoric you and many other disapprove of no matter your side of the political aisle.

      My apologies if my opinionated comment offended you or anyone else.

      5
      June 27, 2021
  5. Joe Murphy said:
    (Continued)

    It’s not for a lack of ammunition.
    Or a lack of desire to engage.

    1
    June 27, 2021
  6. Michael Goldfeder said:
    Between Nancy Pelosi and Warren Buffet, I wonder who would need to spend more time at the Apple Genius Bar if a law was passed to eliminate all Apps being preinstalled on an iPhone?

    That question eliminates all political references and overtones.

    1
    June 27, 2021
    • Michael, People at that level of power have employees dedicated to their work phone. Especially to make sure they don’t leave it behind on some podium. Always will.
      They rarely understood how to use their phones back when all carried BB devices. iPhone OS helps but patience is seldom a virtue of the powerful.
      California legislators seem to be coalescing against the broad swipes these bills take at key industries. While I don’t expect them to pass, at least not as they are worded now, they will inspire/prod various internal groups to identify needed reforms. Facebook, Amazon and Google aren’t showing any indications now, but they will. Google just extended the implementation of their cookie ban.
      Apple will lead, as it usually does, with additional reforms designed to benefit all developers & customers, especially those 660 million Services subscribers. I don’t anticipate a big drop in AppleTV subscribers and highly expect more exciting new programming announcements around the time the free trials expire. Bundles, kids, wives and some guy named Ted will keep them sticky at $5/mo.

      3
      June 27, 2021
  7. Gregg Thurman said:
    they will inspire/prod various internal groups to identify needed reforms

    Short of a strong man dictatorship, no legislative body can respond as fast as changes in tech arrive. No matter what is legislated/regulated, tech will challenge the edges with tweaks here and tweaks there.

    0
    June 27, 2021
  8. Joe Murphy said:
    Aaron, no apology necessary, but thank you.

    No offense taken. Actually, I saw your comment as an invitation and wanted to engage in a friendly dialogue. I certainly agree with you on wishing PED wouldn’t open the door.

    Btw, I enjoy many of your comments

    1
    June 28, 2021
  9. Dan Scropos said:
    Has anyone else seen this? Copied from a Seeking Alpha article:

    Ending Platform Monopolies Act

    This one may as well be called the “Destroy How Apple Does Business Act.” It is co-sponsored by Democrat Pramila Jayapal of Washington, and Republican Lance Gooden of Texan, who also co-sponsored the American Choice and Innovation Act. In all it has 7 Democratic co-sponsors, and 5 Republican. This is the most draconian of them all. While the American Choice and Innovation Act prohibits a lot of things, and hangs the threat of divestment, this bill skips right to divestment.

    My reading of the bill is that it would be impossible for a company to provide an integrated product with hardware, software and services. Just about every announcement Apple just made at their recent Worldwide Developers Conference would be illegal. It blows up their entire business model, and to a lesser extent, Google and Amazon.

    1
    June 28, 2021

Leave a Reply