Antitrust scholar Lina Khan is confirmed as new FTC chair
The Federal Trade Commission's new chair has been confirmed as legal scholar Lina Khan, who has previously maintained that current laws do not sufficiently counter Big Tech anti-competition concerns.

Lina Khan. Credit: An Rong Xu/Getty
As previously expected, Lina Khan has now been sworn in as chair of the US Federal Trade Commission. President Biden's appointment received bipartisan support.
Khan thanked the Senate on Twitter, saying that she plans to continue the FTC's mission to protect consumers.
Khan has previously researched technology markets, and served as counsel to the US House Judiciary subcommittee. A Columbia Law School professor, Khan has also been an aide to FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra.
According to Reuters, US Senator Elizabeth Warren -- previously greatly critical of Big Tech companies -- described the appointment as "tremendous news."
"With Chair Khan at the helm," she said in a statement, " we have a huge opportunity to make big, structural change by reviving antitrust enforcement and fighting monopolies that threaten our economy, our society, and our democracy."
Keep up with everything Apple in the weekly AppleInsider Podcast -- and get a fast news update from AppleInsider Daily. Just say, "Hey, Siri," to your HomePod mini and ask for these podcasts, and our latest HomeKit Insider episode too.If you want an ad-free main AppleInsider Podcast experience, you can support the AppleInsider podcast by subscribing for $5 per month through Apple's Podcasts app, or via Patreon if you prefer any other podcast player.AppleInsider is also bringing you the best Apple-related deals for Amazon Prime Day 2021. There are bargains before, during, and even after Prime Day on June 21 and 22 -- with every deal at your fingertips throughout the event.

Lina Khan. Credit: An Rong Xu/Getty
As previously expected, Lina Khan has now been sworn in as chair of the US Federal Trade Commission. President Biden's appointment received bipartisan support.
Khan thanked the Senate on Twitter, saying that she plans to continue the FTC's mission to protect consumers.
I'm so grateful to the Senate for my confirmation. Congress created the FTC to safeguard fair competition and protect consumers, workers, and honest businesses from unfair & deceptive practices. I look forward to upholding this mission with vigor and serving the American public.
-- Lina Khan (@linamkhan)
Khan has previously researched technology markets, and served as counsel to the US House Judiciary subcommittee. A Columbia Law School professor, Khan has also been an aide to FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra.
According to Reuters, US Senator Elizabeth Warren -- previously greatly critical of Big Tech companies -- described the appointment as "tremendous news."
"With Chair Khan at the helm," she said in a statement, " we have a huge opportunity to make big, structural change by reviving antitrust enforcement and fighting monopolies that threaten our economy, our society, and our democracy."
Keep up with everything Apple in the weekly AppleInsider Podcast -- and get a fast news update from AppleInsider Daily. Just say, "Hey, Siri," to your HomePod mini and ask for these podcasts, and our latest HomeKit Insider episode too.If you want an ad-free main AppleInsider Podcast experience, you can support the AppleInsider podcast by subscribing for $5 per month through Apple's Podcasts app, or via Patreon if you prefer any other podcast player.AppleInsider is also bringing you the best Apple-related deals for Amazon Prime Day 2021. There are bargains before, during, and even after Prime Day on June 21 and 22 -- with every deal at your fingertips throughout the event.
Comments
If this newly appointed FTC Chair is thinking along the lines of Warren, she will be attacking honest and wonderful businesses using deceptive and dishonest practices in a way that will "threaten our economy, our society, and our democracy."
But as long as we are going with uninformed speculation, I'll answer as if I made cornchip's comment too:
If the newly appointed FTC Chair is from an alien race hell bent on subjecting the human race because we taste good she will be attacking honest and wonderful people using deceptive and dishonest practices in a way that will "thread our existence"
- Buying up companies that make products that Apple wants, hiring their execs and terminating most of the employees and then incorporating the product so that they can make maximum profit from it: not great.
- Sherlocking companies development without buying them up because you have Billion-Dollar lawyers that can squash any complaint from a small business that made an app that they charge $10 for and they make a reasonable profit.
- While NPEs need to be totally shut down, and Patent Law needs to be revamped, Apple does its own skirting of the law in this area as well.
- EULAs are a joke and need to be terminated. Why should Apple be able to tell me how many copies of their OS I can virtualize on a machine (they don't charge for their OS, and it is based on an Open Source/Open License OS), or if I can manage to make it work on a similar machine that wasn't built by them. If it has a EULA, then I am NOT purchasing it, I'm renting it.
- Apple is making BUCKETS of money on the App Store, else they would have put up a big graphic in the Fortnite trial about how the 30% cut barely covers cost. Instead they dodged with "we don't quantify the cost against the profits". That is total crap. I'm not saying they don't have the right to make a buck, and Epic's reasoning is totally bonkers, but maybe aligning it against cost would make it understood why they have to charge what they charge, or allow some public pressure to make them tier their charges even more than the two tier system they currently use (I would also note that their own apps cost them, but the basis for that should only be the 30% of the price that they charge everyone else).
There are more. I don't think the aggressive step of breaking up Apple is a reasonable thing to do, or in the public interest. However, a little oversight of a company that is sitting on a cash pile that could pay the debt for a number of U.S. States is not out of line. Especially since their products rely on the services that those states pay for (Roads, Electricity, etc.).I agree that this practice should definitely be scrutinized, but I'd argue that it's been done on a far larger scale by others.