The comparison she uses is from the late 19th Century, when a handful of companies, or "trusts", owned key parts of the infrastructure of the US - such as the railroads. "Anti-trust" legislation was passed to try to prevent companies holding monopoly power. However, critics like Ms Khan say current laws aren't fit for the competition challenges of today. "These firms essentially provide infrastructure to the digital age," she told the BBC in her previous interview.

"A small group of private executives are setting the rules of who gets to use the infrastructure and on what terms," she said.

In 2017, Ms Khan wrote a paper called "Amazon's Antitrust Paradox" for the Yale Law Journal. It argued that the traditional anti-trust focus on price was inadequate to identify potential harms done by Amazon. This is a much-repeated criticism of the laws around antitrust. Traditionally "monopolistic" behaviour would result in price increases for consumers. However, that doesn't often happen when it comes to Big Tech. In fact, when it comes to Facebook and Google, their services are mostly free to the consumer, while Amazon will often have lower prices than its competitors.

See:  Penrose Report: Power to the People: Stronger Consumer Choice and Competition

Instead, the argument is much more nuanced. For example, it's argued that these companies are so big, and control so much of the internet, that they can undercut their competitors. Current anti-trust laws don't necessarily reflect that reality, and once again this is something about which Ms Khan has talked.

"Even when services are good for consumers, they can hurt a whole set of other interests - be it workers, be it business formation, be it democracy at large." she told the BBC.

Ms Khan's appointment has been hailed by anti-trust campaigners, and in particular by Democrats. Elizabeth Warren - who supported breaking up Big Tech in her 2020 presidential campaign - described the appointment as "tremendous news". And in the FTC, Ms Khan now has teeth to back up her ideas. She has gone from legal activist and academic to holding perhaps the most powerful consumer protection job in the country.

Continue to the full article --> here