FTC Asks Court To Temporarily Halt Microsoft's Acquisition of Activision (reuters.com) 10
The FTC has asked a federal court to temporarily halt Microsoft's $69 billion acquisition of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard. Microsoft won its fight against the FTC on Tuesday, after a California judge said the agency had failed to show the deal would be illegal under antitrust law. The FTC appealed that loss yesterday, and Microsoft said it would fight that appeal. Reuters reports: In its motion, the FTC asked for an order that would prevent the deal from closing until after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled on a separate stay request filed with that court. Any outstanding regulatory hurdle makes it more likely the agreement between Microsoft and Activision will expire on July 18 without the deal having been completed. After July 18, either company will be free to walk away from the deal unless they negotiate an extension.
In its motion for the stay to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, the FTC argued her denial of a preliminary injunction to halt the deal "raises serious, substantial issues for the Court of Appeals to resolve." Specifically, the FTC said she had applied the wrong standard in considering the agency's request for a preliminary injunction. "Granting an injunction pending appeal is warranted because the FTC is likely to succeed on appeal," the agency wrote.
In its motion for the stay to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, the FTC argued her denial of a preliminary injunction to halt the deal "raises serious, substantial issues for the Court of Appeals to resolve." Specifically, the FTC said she had applied the wrong standard in considering the agency's request for a preliminary injunction. "Granting an injunction pending appeal is warranted because the FTC is likely to succeed on appeal," the agency wrote.
The FTC needs better lawyers (Score:1)
There's Lina Khan's opinions ... and there's the law. Only one of those things matters.
The FTC lawyers should try arguing the law as it stands rather than how Lina thinks it should be.
What a waste of time (Score:2)
As many others have already pointed out in prior article posts, whether Microsoft eventually builds a moat of exclusivity around Call of Duty is absolutely moot.
Almost everything Nintendo has published since the 90s has been exclusive, and Sony has a full arcade worth of exclusive titles and long-lived IP.
It honestly looks to me like the FTC is just pissed because Microsoft is huge, and their palms haven't been appropriately greased.
What a bunch of louses... GET A JOB!
There are so many other useful things t
Re:What a waste of time (Score:4, Insightful)
As many others have already pointed out in prior article posts, whether Microsoft eventually builds a moat of exclusivity around Call of Duty is absolutely moot.
Almost everything Nintendo has published since the 90s has been exclusive, and Sony has a full arcade worth of exclusive titles and long-lived IP.
Wrong comparison. Microsoft is free to publish *their own* titles exclusive to XBox. The issue here is Microsoft buying up an *existing* popular franchise and no one believe they would not make it exclusive. Calling it moot is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the real issue.
MS, Sony, Nintendo publishing their own titles exclusive to their own platform is not an issue, that's fair competition. Anyone of them BUYING UP existing cross-platform titles and turning it exclusive is the key issue at hand.
To make a fair comparison you should give example of Nintendo and Sony buying up cross-platform game companies and turning popular franchise exclusive.
Re: (Score:3)
The issue here is Microsoft buying up an *existing* popular franchise and no one believe they would not make it exclusive. Calling it moot is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the real issue.
It's moot because it's already been addressed. MS signed deals with Nintendo to make CoD available on their platform for 10 years, and also signed a 10-year deal with Valve to simultaneously release new CoD titles on Steam. A similar deal was offered to Sony, who declined and instead decided to use the FTC to fight a legal battle in order to maintain their dominant position over a smaller competitor.
Basically all other countries' regulatory bodies have found the deal would not result in a substantial lessen
Re: (Score:1)
Sadly you are wrong, and let me demonstrate you that with a simple game franchise : Final Fantasy 7 Remake.
Exclusive bullshit deal with Nintendo and Sony, so that PC and others platform come ages and years after the story has been data mined, and leaked over youtube and every single possible video platform in the world, but in the end of the day, they still did the PC, so they can fill their thirst of gamers money till the last drop. Maybe Microsoft should do the same thing to be fair ? Release COD on sony
Re: (Score:2)
Exclusive bullshit deal with Nintendo and Sony, so that PC and others platform come ages and years after the story has been data mined, and leaked over youtube and every single possible video platform in the world, but in the end of the day, they still did the PC, so they can fill their thirst of gamers money till the last drop. Maybe Microsoft should do the same thing to be fair ? Release COD on sony and nintendo, but 6 months later ? RIGHT ?
Can I have your eye as well sir? My vengeance knows no bounds.
Microsoft has done nothing wrong
You just proposed them doing exactly that.
raise the quality of the game made by Activision and Blizzard
Pffft.....You clearly don't know what the bread and butter of this game for the shareholders even is.
possibly bring better anti-cheat
Nope. Real anti cheat requires an impartial judge / referee. Just like any other sport / competition. Guess what is the one thing the entire industry doesn't want to pay for? An impartial judge / referee.
AI detection
That would require having direct access to data that isn't compromised by a cheater / hack tool. T
Re: (Score:2)