Google, Facebook data use ‘must benefit consumer’

There’s a need to build evidence on how data is used. Picture: AFP.

US data expert Christopher Yoo will caution the ACCC against taking actions against the big digital platform companies for the sake of it, warning of the need to ensure consumers are the beneficiaries.

Professor Yoo will deliver the annual Bob Baxt lecture at Melbourne University tonight with the theme that big is not necessarily bad.

The federal government is due to hand down its response to the ACCC digital platforms report by year’s end. As a bare minimum, the media industry is hoping that the government directs the ACCC to do more work on the adtech market, which is where Google, Facebook et al use their data to dominate digital advertising.

• Implement ACCC’s digital platform recommendations
• Tech giants under pressure

Knowing just how the data is used will then be used to force the platforms to pay for the data it gets from others (like media companies) to share the benefits in an equitable way.

Professor Yoo’s aim is to build evidence on just how data is used, which can form the basis of subsequent legal action.

He is the John H. Chestnut Professor of Law, Communication, and Computer and Information Science and the Founding Director of the Center for Technology, Innovation and Competition at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.

Big data is collected by the likes of Facebook, which each day has 10 billion messages, 4.5 billion “likes” and 350 million pictures on its network each day.

Purpose important

Big is fine, but it’s what you do with it that counts and Google claims it uses only 0.1 per cent of the data that crosses its network.

Data is split into the five “Vs” - velocity, volume, value, variety and veracity - and obviously performance on each dictates its usefulness.

In an interview with The Australian, Professor Yoo said data works by “scale economics, but also diminishing returns”.

The more you have is sometimes less useful as the volume of information expands.

Microsoft cases

The 2001 Microsoft cases in the US were landmark anti-trust cases alleging the company abused its market power by forcing the bundling of its Internet Explorer browser with its basic operating system.

The case ended in a settlement where the company agreed to share its operating system, but debate still rages as to whether consumers actually benefited from the settlement.

If owning the data is not the key, then if the owner spends lots of money inventing the right algorithms and other data science, then maybe that might benefit consumers.

The message for the ACCC and other anti-trust authorities is to be careful what cases they take to ensure they get the best outcome for consumers.

The ACCC said it is working on five cases from its platforms inquiry, including one looking at Google’s alleged role in the collapse of rival, Unlockd.

“The law can identify problems, but it may not be the best at finding the solution, if one exists,” Professor Yoo said.

The starting point is obviously building the evidence.

“Tensions are building globally against digital platforms and I think we are at the start of what will be a long-term battle,” Professor Yoo said.