Adobe-Figma Deal Likely To Attract Antitrust Scrutiny (axios.com) 20
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Axios: Some users of Figma's design software reacted with dismay on Thursday when they found out the company was going to be acquired by Adobe, the unloved giant in the space. Other observers immediately concluded that the acquisition looks downright illegal under antitrust laws.
Why it matters: The Biden administration is on the record as wanting to beef up antitrust enforcement. The Figma deal, at $20 billion, is certainly large enough to grab the attention of regulators. The big question is whether they'll conclude that suing to block it is a case they can win. Either the Department of Justice or the Federal Trade Commission could review the merger; both have taken a renewed interest in software and digital mergers.
Between the lines: The Clayton Antitrust Act says any acquisition that would reduce competition in an industry is illegal. Figma was founded as an Adobe competitor and has grown impressively by doing exactly that -- implying there's a case to be made that this acquisition is anti-competitive. Insofar as Adobe is already the dominant player in the space, any acquisition, let alone a $20 billion one, will be looked at carefully. "The fact that Adobe is not typically identified as a Big Tech platform should provide [Adobe and Figma] with little if any comfort," Charles Rule, a partner at the Rule Garza Howley law firm and former DOJ antitrust official, tells Axios. "This deal appears to raise straightforward, traditional antitrust issues," he says.
"There's enough here to get a close look, and maybe a complaint," adds a former FTC antitrust official. Another former FTC attorney tells Axios to expect a thorough initial investigation into possible overlaps.
Why it matters: The Biden administration is on the record as wanting to beef up antitrust enforcement. The Figma deal, at $20 billion, is certainly large enough to grab the attention of regulators. The big question is whether they'll conclude that suing to block it is a case they can win. Either the Department of Justice or the Federal Trade Commission could review the merger; both have taken a renewed interest in software and digital mergers.
Between the lines: The Clayton Antitrust Act says any acquisition that would reduce competition in an industry is illegal. Figma was founded as an Adobe competitor and has grown impressively by doing exactly that -- implying there's a case to be made that this acquisition is anti-competitive. Insofar as Adobe is already the dominant player in the space, any acquisition, let alone a $20 billion one, will be looked at carefully. "The fact that Adobe is not typically identified as a Big Tech platform should provide [Adobe and Figma] with little if any comfort," Charles Rule, a partner at the Rule Garza Howley law firm and former DOJ antitrust official, tells Axios. "This deal appears to raise straightforward, traditional antitrust issues," he says.
"There's enough here to get a close look, and maybe a complaint," adds a former FTC antitrust official. Another former FTC attorney tells Axios to expect a thorough initial investigation into possible overlaps.
Gotta say (Score:5, Funny)
True antitrust enforcement in the USA is usually a figma of our imagination.
Re: (Score:2)
And it will remain that way until proven.
Pretty telling when the only real reason Adobe raised the ire of anti-trust was "The fact that Adobe is not typically identified as a Big Tech platform..."
Translation: They didn't quite put enough zeros on that check, like the rest of the Donor Class does. But you know, elections are coming up...
Great joke idea (Score:2)
I think it would be cool if I can somehow contrive a joke that involves me saying "it was a figma-nt of their imagination." Something like "they thought this merger would be a good idea, but it turned out to be a figmant of their imagination" .. 3/10?
Re: (Score:2)
... 3/10?
Your joke rating may depend on other related factors.
For example, are you a Dad with some grey hair who enjoys slapping your own knee after making such a comment? 'Cause that guy gets an 11/10.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not just Figma nutz?
"Illegal" (Score:3)
> Between the lines: The Clayton Antitrust Act says any acquisition that would reduce competition in an industry is illegal.
If only anyone in government paid attention.
T-Mobile acquired SPRINT. Number of wireless telephone service providers competing with each other decreased, and competition decreased.
Amazon bought iRobot. Same comments.
AstraZeneca bough Alexion...
Disney bought 21st Century Fox...
Discovery acquired Warner Media...
Those are just five multi billion dollar deals within the last few months. There's plenty more. Clearly neither the previous administration nor the current one seem to care to stop this process.
Sure, it's illegal as per the Clayton Act, but if prosecutors won't prosecute, toothless illegality is the substance of speeding on a rural highway. No cop, no violation. Also if you have a lot of money to pay lawyers, you can do whatever you like. Call it what you like, but the former president of the US is a master at this con-job.
My gut suggests the point at which employees are told this is happening... the lawyers have already strategized how to make it happen.
E
Re: (Score:3)
Here's the problem in a nutshell.
Antitrust is being defined as the removal of a competitor. Not the destruction of one once acquired.
AutoDesk should never have been able to acquire Maya and Softimage, but it did, and now Softimage is extinct and Maya is pretty much a dead product to learn.
Adobe acquired Macromedia, destroyed all their products, and then went subscription only.
It is NOT in any software industry's interest to see the merger of a company if it will result in two similar products being owned by
Re: (Score:2)
"Adobe buying Maya", Autodesk, not Adobe. Adobe should have been required to spin off Macromedia's products instead of shutting them down. Notice how Flash was the only product that ever got integrated into Adobe's software ecosystem, and then subsequently didn't improve it very much until it got traction as a video player, and then subsequently got disposed of?
Re: (Score:2)
Really, the only reason Flash died was because Steve Jobs (rightly) decided Flash was poison and blocked it off his phone which essentially led to a
Re: (Score:2)
Your open-sourcing idea doesn't really make much sense either. Why would a company buy a competitor only to put the competing p
Seems like SOP for Adobe (Score:3)
Isn't this typically how they've "competed" in the past - by buying out their competitor? Remember Aldus? Remember Macromedia?
Re: (Score:2)
At least their software is decent overall and reasonably well priced. I have a Creative Suites monthly license, and for what I get I think it's really decent value. In contrast, go try to pay for a copy of Solidworks, PowerPCB, or even worse, something like ProE/Cartia. The pricing is obscene, and the software is various levels of crypto-craptic (Solidworks aside).
It has been this way for at least the last 15 years, and Adobe always provided relatively decent value for money.
But absolutely it would be much
Re: (Score:3)
Affinity competes with Adobe in terms of Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.
Single small payment and the software is yours to use without monthly payments.
Penpot is a Solid Open-Source Figma Alternative (Score:3)
Penpot is a Solid Open-Source Figma Alternative
https://news.itsfoss.com/penpo... [itsfoss.com]
Maybe Adobe can improve the performance (Score:2)
As well it fucking should (Score:2)
Why even pretend we're going to get benefits from the competition part of capitalism if it's just an occasional tax they have to pay off a few founders with
Did anyone tell Kaseya? (Score:2)