Often corporations try to convince the FTC to stop a illegal sale by making pledges on the EGS front or by promising to use their power for the greater good, said Lina Khan. In financial jargon, the rules that are relevant to the organization define the three domains; Environmental, Social, Governance, etc. Those standards should be considered to regulate the company’s behavior from the point of view of social rights, the environment, the general policy. According to Khan, a lot of companies try to avoid that public desire to pass takeover proposals, but these would not attack the FTC, which are solely based on the law of operation. With the antitrust laws, we don’t allow us to overlook the illegality of acquisitions as a result of mergers, Khan said. Let’s serve as the gulf enforcers of the law and stop illegal activity, and not make deals that lead to competitiveness in exchange for non-related benefits. Microsoft is not mentioned in Khans article, but it’s easier to see the reference to the acquisition of Activision Blizzard in the words of the FTC chairwoman, who has reportedly reportedly been unable to focus on a particular topic in relation to antitrust. This means that, regardless of the commitments expressed by Microsoft in regards to the possible improvement of the conditions of the workers, and the situation of Activision Blizzard in general, the FTC will only look at the technical aspects of the acquisition related to the competition. This can undermine the support for the takeover announced by different workers unions for example, or any other side of the operation that may cause harm to the business’s equilibrium. Evidently, it remains to be seen if the acquisition of Activision Blizzard is actually illegal, but the legal proceeding to begin is a lightenstein.
