Microsoft admits it should not have argued the FTC is unconstitutional
Enlarge / Microsoft's arguments against the FTC's halting of its Activision Blizzard purchase now rely more on Call of Duty than constitutional authority and corporate civil rights. (credit: Michael Ciaglo/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Microsoft has amended its response to the Federal Trade Commission's suit trying to halt a $69 billion purchase of Activision Blizzard, no longer claiming the FTC is unconstitutional by nature and denying the company its 5th Amendment rights.
David Cuddy, public affairs spokesperson for Microsoft, told Axios' Stephen Totilo that the company "put all potential arguments on the table internally and should have dropped these defenses before we filed. The FTC has an important mission to protect competition and consumers, and we quickly updated our response to omit language suggesting otherwise based on the Constitution," Cuddy told Axios.
Microsoft's original Federal Trade Commission response (PDF) stated that proceedings against Microsoft were invalid "because the structure of the Commission as an independent agency that wields significant executive power, and the associated constraints on removal of the Commissioners and other Commission officials, violates Article II of the US Constitution and the separation of powers." Another point claimed that the use of an Administrative Law Judge, rather than a typical judge with a lifetime appointment, was a violation of Article III.
Read 6 remaining paragraphs | Comments
from Gaming & Culture – Ars Technica https://ift.tt/ot3dFXk