This thread is inherently political, as the process (and its subsequent discussion and regulation) is political in nature and reality. Therefore, the occasional veer into the political discussion around the overall landscape isn’t unwarranted, nor should it be surprising. We’ve allowed plenty of actual off-topic discussion and plenty of discourse that many find inconvenient/unwanted (in this thread and others), therefore the same applies here for a discussion point that is relevant.
17 Likes
I feel like the CMA and Microsoft might have come to an agreement(If true) to close the deal, except the UK(atleast until the CMA and Microsoft iron out remaining issues) because the CMA want to keep their ability to claim jurisdiction on a global scale. They probably know that the issue of comity is one argument that the CAT will side with Microsoft as there are blurred lines in enforcing British mandates on a global scale( there’s no agreements within nations, differing national interest etc). They don’t want to lose that power is my guess.
2 Likes
I’ve said it for most of my life, but being antagonistic and annoying people is a terrible way to get people to your side.
The law is what it is. If you want to change the law, great, good luck. But trying to enforce your ideology onto the legal system makes absolutely no sense and proves that Lina Khan shouldn’t have the job she does.
Saying “Your honor, we may not have any facts or evidence, but the defendant looks guilty” isn’t going to win you any cases. 
6 Likes
Saturday is my birthday. That would be a good day to close 
But it has to wait till Monday doesn’t it?
2 Likes
I didn’t really follow much lately, except that the FTC lost over the PI. However, I also think the deal is gonna close soon, mainly due to Activision fixing all older COD games servers. Why would they do it now if not for them expecting these servers to be full again pretty soon ? I might just go back to Black Ops 1 to finish all the prestiges in multiplayer.
1 Like
Nobody can enforce something on a worldwide basis, but as long as nobody challenges the UK on that, they can claim that they have that power. The worst that can happen is a company that say “no”, because it will make a first case example for less powerful companies with less money and cheaper lawyers.
Edit : there is a difference between EU enforcing their remedies on a worldwide level and UK claiming that the deal can not be closed outside UK if they decide it.
2 Likes
I like that every step of the way on this Sony shot themselves in the foot mainly due to their complete arrogance
11 Likes
11 Likes
I think the difference is that the EC only expects those deals to go through on their territory’s, and for them to cover EU citizens outside of the EU territories. But Microsoft offered these deals to cover a global scale to show their commitment.
Depending on how negotiations are going (or expected to go) with the CMA I’m wondering if just closing over them and negotiating a reduced fine might be the safer option even if ABK would extend. It would make sure there’s less time for the FTC to try and pull anything.
1 Like
9 Likes
Yup I agree, the UK or any country in general cant enforce something in a world wide basis unless it is agreed upon between nations. The CMA can get away with it is because no one questioned them about it, as you said. Imagine if two Chinese companies merge and the US objects about it, would SAMR defer to the FTC or DOJ… no lol. It becomes a battle of political leverage and thats not something a country like the UK(the CMA specifically) can win all the time. Its just a matter of follow the leader for now, but this time, the UK(CMA) tries to be one, and no one is really giving them flack for it as of this moment.
2 Likes
And people thought “Arrogant Sony” ever left…
10 Likes
You learn something new everyday, I thought Turkey was already in the EU!
The fines are one thing but closing without the cma prohibition being lifted is breaking UK law. I think the issue is how that would be seen reputationally for MS. I mean we all know how ludicrous the FTC are being so why don’t MS just close tomorrow ignore the TRO and take any fine and deal with the legal fallout? Nobody is suggesting that and I suspect for the same reasons.
It’s not a pure fine vs extension cost calculation it’s also whether MS want a reputation of outright breaking a countries law and riding roughshod over them. For future acquisitions or investigations by regulators you can bet they’d all use that precedent in their legal cases.
Sony making record sales. Their fans think they are never wrong. Is anyone really surprised that they are arrogant?
6 Likes
This appeal/TRO/whatever it’s called has to have a decision made by Friday night otherwise MS can do what they want right? i.e. close the deal
So if their TRO gets submitted how long does MS get to make a response? If they don’t give MS enough time, couldn’t MS just run out the clock and say “oh well, too bad, should have submitted sooner”?
But even if they do give MS enough time to submit a response, wouldn’t the new judges need enough time to be able to go over both responses? That seems like way too much work to get done in 48 hours
Source - trust me bro
1 Like
IMMEDIATE HARMS TO THE PUBLIC
Clown show.
14 Likes