with the chief executives of the tech industries

與科技行業的首席執行官

four most powerful players,

四個最強大的球員。

Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Apple's Tim Cook,

亞馬遜的傑夫-貝佐斯、蘋果的蒂姆-庫克。

Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, and Google Sundar Pichai.

Facebook的馬克-扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）和谷歌的桑達爾-皮查伊（Sundar Pichai）。

Since last June, the house judiciary committee

自去年6月以來，眾議院司法委員會

has been engaged in a sweeping investigation

徹查

of each of the four companies,

四家公司各自的。

honing in on how they stifle competition

深入瞭解他們如何扼殺競爭。

in the tech industry.

在科技行業。

These companies have been consolidating power

這些公司一直在整合力量

for a long time,

長久以來。

and now, Congress is getting ready to do something about it.

而現在，國會正準備做點什麼。

- Open markets are predicated on the idea

- 公開市場是基於以下理念

that if a company harms people, consumers, workers,

如果一個公司傷害了人、消費者、工人。

and business partners will choose another option.

和商業夥伴會選擇另一種方案。

We're here today because that choice is no longer possible.

我們今天在這裡，是因為這種選擇已經不可能了。

The purpose of today's hearing

今天聽證會的目的

is to examine the dominance of Amazon,

是考察亞馬遜的主導地位。

Apple, Facebook and Google.

蘋果、Facebook和谷歌。

- [Kelly] For years,

- 好多年了

antitrust experts have been building the case

反壟斷專家一直在立案

against big techs questionable acquisitions,

對付大科技的疑問收購。

predatory pricing, and copycat behaviors.

掠奪性定價，以及模仿行為。

The CEO's had to face those arguments head-on on Wednesday.

CEO們不得不在週三直面這些爭論。

- Amazon runs the largest online marketplace in America,

- 亞馬遜經營著美國最大的在線市場。

capturing 70% of all online marketplace sales.

佔據了所有在線市場銷售額的70%。

Despite a litany of privacy scandals

儘管有一連串的隱私醜聞

and record-breaking fines,

和破紀錄的罰款。

Facebook continues to enjoy booming profits,

Facebook繼續享受著蓬勃的利潤。

$18 billion last year alone.

去年就有180億美元。

Google is the world's largest online search engine,

谷歌是全球最大的在線搜索引擎。

capturing more than 90% of searches online.

佔據了在線搜索的90%以上。

- [Kelly] These are four very different companies,

- 這是四家非常不同的公司。

but the committee use Wednesday's hearing

但委員會利用週三的聽證會

to show how similar they were

以示相似

when responding to competitors.

在應對競爭對手時。

In particular, the committee looked at how

特別是，委員會研究瞭如何

each company controls distribution,

每個公司都控制著分銷。

surveys nascent companies,

調查新生公司。

and how they use their market dominance

以及他們如何利用其市場支配地位

to suppress competition.

以抑制競爭。

- We used to have a policy that restricted competitors

- 我們以前有一個政策，限制競爭對手

from using our platform.

從使用我們的平臺。

- Okay Mr. Zuckerberg, these examples

- 好吧，扎克伯格先生，這些例子

and supporting documents strongly suggests

和證明文件強烈建議

that Facebook does weaponize its policy

臉譜網確實將其政策武器化

to undermine competitors.

以削弱競爭對手。

- Is it true that Amazon refers to third party sellers

- 亞馬遜所說的第三方賣家是真的嗎？

as internal competitors?

作為內部競爭對手？

- We've interviewed many small businesses

- 我們採訪過很多小企業

and they use the words like bullying, fear and panic

他們用欺負、恐懼、驚恐等字眼來形容。

to describe their relationship with Amazon.

來描述他們與亞馬遜的關係。

- That's an enormous amount of power.

- 這是一個巨大的力量。

- [Kelly] The committee argued that companies

- [凱利]委員會認為，公司：

like Facebook and Google

像Facebook和谷歌

control how information is disseminated.

控制資訊的傳播方式；

The same goes for Apple and Amazon,

蘋果和亞馬遜也是如此。

but when it comes to their app stores and marketplaces.

但當涉及到他們的應用商店和市場。

- Apple is the sole decision maker

- 蘋果是唯一的決策者

as to whether an app is made available to app users

至於應用程序是否提供給應用程序用戶。

through the Apple store.

通過蘋果商店。

Isn't that correct?

對不對？

- If it's a native app? Yes, sir.

- 如果是原生應用？是的，先生。

If it's a weapon, no.

如果是武器，就不可以

- Throughout our investigation,

- 在我們的調查過程中。

we've heard concerns that rules governing

我們聽說有人擔心，關於

the app store review process

應用商店的審核過程

are not available to the app developers.

是不能提供給應用開發者的。

The rules are made up as you go.

規矩是隨心所欲制定的。

They are upper trevally interpreted and enforced,

它們的解釋和執行都很嚴格。

and are subject to change whenever Apple sees fit to change.

並可在蘋果公司認為合適的時候進行更改。

And developers have no choice,

而開發商別無選擇。

but to go along with the changes

但為了配合變化

or they must leave the app store.

或者他們必須離開應用商店。

That's an enormous amount of power.

這是一個巨大的力量。

Mr. Cook, does Apple not treat all app developers equally?

庫克先生，蘋果是不是對所有的應用開發者一視同仁？

- Sir, we treat every developer the same,

- 先生，我們對每個開發商都一視同仁。

because we care so deeply about privacy

因為我們非常關心隱私

and security and quality.

和安全和品質。

We do look at every app before it goes on,

我們確實會在每一個應用上線之前，都會對其進行考察。

but those rules apply evenly to everyone.

但這些規則對每個人都是平等適用的。

- [Kelly] Surveillance is key

- [凱利]監視是關鍵

to the committee's investigation.

對委員會的調查。

Throughout the hearing, lawmakers argue that

在整個聽證會上，立法者認為

each company has used its dominance in the tech industry

每家公司都利用其在科技行業的主導地位。

to keep a watchful eye on their competitors.

盯住競爭對手。

Google face tough questions from lawmakers

谷歌面臨立法者的嚴厲質疑

who fear that its dominance in search

擔心其在搜索方面的主導地位的人

allows it to monitor the web traffic of competitors.

使其可以監控競爭對手的網絡流量。

This information could result in the company

這些資訊可能導致公司

ranking competitors lower in search results.

將競爭對手在搜索結果中的排名降低。

- In 2010, Google stole restaurant reviews from Yelp

- 2010年，谷歌搶走了Yelp的餐廳評價

to bootstrap its own rival local search business.

來引導自己的競爭對手在地搜索業務。

- Mr. Pichai, do you know how Google responded

- 皮查伊先生，你知道谷歌是如何迴應的嗎？

when Yelp asked you to stop stealing their reviews?

當Yelp要求你停止竊取他們的評論時?

Well, I'll tell you,

好吧，我告訴你。

our investigation shows that Google's response

我們的調查顯示，谷歌的迴應

was to threaten to delist Yelp entirely.

是威脅要將Yelp完全除名。

In other words, the choice Google gave you up was,

換句話說，谷歌給你的選擇是。

let us steal your content

讓我們竊取你的內容

or effectively disappear from the web.

或實際上從網絡上消失。

Mr. Pichai, isn't that anti-competitive?

Pichai先生，這不是反競爭嗎？

- Congressmen, you know, when I run the company,

- 議員們，你們知道，當我經營公司的時候。

I'm really focused on giving users what they want.

我真的專注於給用戶提供他們想要的東西。

We conduct ourselves to the highest standard,

我們以最高的標準來要求自己。

happy to engage, understand the specifics

樂於參與，瞭解具體情況

and answer your questions further.

並進一步回答您的問題。

- [Kelly] You can make the same argument

- [凱利]你可以提出同樣的論點

for Facebook buying Instagram,

為Facebook收購Instagram。

Amazon buying Ring,

亞馬遜購買環。

or Apple using the app store to fend off competing software.

或蘋果利用應用商店來抵禦競爭軟件。

Has Facebook ever threatened

Facebook有沒有威脅過

to clone the products of another company

盜用他人產品

while also attempting to acquire that company?

同時還試圖收購該公司？

- Congresswoman, not that I would recall.

- 女議員，我不記得了。

- And I'd like to just remind you that you are under oath

- 我只想提醒你，你是發過誓的。

and there are quotes from Facebook's own documents.

並有引用Facebook自己的文件。

Prior to acquiring Instagram,

在收購Instagram之前。

Facebook began developing a similar product called

Facebook開始開發類似的產品，名為

Facebook Camera, correct?

臉書相機，對嗎？

- Congresswoman, that's correct.

- 國會議員，這是正確的。

- Did you ever use this very similar Facebook camera product

- 你有沒有用過這個非常類似的Facebook相機產品？

to threaten Instagram's founder, Kevin Systrom?

來威脅Instagram的創始人Kevin Systrom？

- Congresswoman, I'm not sure

- 女議員，我不確定

what you would mean by threatened.

你說的威脅是什麼意思？

I think it was public that we were building a camera app

我認為這是公開的，我們正在建立一個相機應用程序。

at the time, that was a well-documented thing.

在當時，這是一個有據可查的事情。

- In a chat you told Mr. Systrom that Facebook was

- 在一次哈拉中，你告訴Systrom先生，Facebook是... ...

"Developing our own photo strategy.

"制定我們自己的拍照策略。

So, how we engage now will also determine

所以，我們現在如何參與也將決定

how much we're partners versus competitors down the line."

我們是多少合作伙伴與競爭對手的下線。"

Instagram's founders seem to think that was a threat.

Instagram的創始人似乎認為這是一種威脅。

He confided in an investor at the time

他向當時的一位投資人透露

that he feared you would go into

他擔心你會進入

"Destroy mode" if he didn't sell Instagram to you.

"毀滅模式 "如果他沒有把Instagram賣給你。

- Congresswoman, I wanna respectfully disagree

- 議員，我不同意你的觀點。

with the characterization.

與定性。

I think it was that this was a space

我想是這是一個空間

that we were going to compete in one way or another.

我們將以某種方式進行競爭。

I don't view those conversations as a threat in any way.

我不認為這些對話是一種威脅。

- I'm just using the documents

- 我只是在使用這些文件

and the testimony that the committee

以及委員會的證詞

has collected from others.

從別人那裡收集到的。

Did you warn Evan Spiegel, the founder of Snapchat,

你有沒有提醒Snapchat的創始人Evan Spiegel。

that Facebook was in the process of cloning

Facebook正在克隆

the features of his company,

他公司的特點。

while also attempting to buy Snapchat?

同時還試圖收購Snapchat？

- Congresswoman, I don't remember

- 女議員，我不記得了

those specific conversations,

那些具體的對話。

but that was also an area where it was very clear

但這也是一個非常清楚的領域

that we were going to be building something.

我們要建造的東西。

- [Kelly] Finally, the committee honed in

- [凱利]最後，委員會磨練出了：

on how each platform allegedly abuses its control

關於各平臺被指如何濫用控制權的問題

over current technologies

在現有技術上

to strengthen their market dominance.

以加強其市場主導地位。

Lawmakers argued that through self preferencing

立法者認為，通過自我優選

and predatory pricing,

和掠奪性定價。

these platforms have made it difficult

這些平臺使

for small businesses and competitors to succeed.

為小企業和競爭對手的成功。

And in one case we heard from one Amazon bookseller

而在一個案例中，我們從一位亞馬遜的書商那裡得知

who was blocked by selling books for no apparent reason.

被無故賣書封殺的人。

- We were a top book seller on Amazon.com,

- 我們是亞馬遜網站上的暢銷書。

and we worked day-and-night very hard

我們沒日沒夜地工作，非常辛苦

towards growing our business

為發展我們的業務

and maintaining a five-star feedback rating.

並保持五星反饋等級。

Most importantly, this business feeds a total of 14 people.

最重要的是，這家企業一共養活了14個人。

And as we grew, we were shrinking Amazon's market share

而隨著我們的發展，我們正在縮小亞馬遜的市場份額。

in the textbooks category.

教科書類中。

So now, in retaliation

所以現在，為了報復

Amazon started restricting us from selling.

亞馬遜開始限制我們銷售。

They started with a few titles in early 2019,

他們在2019年初開始了一些題目。

and within six months,

並在6個月內。

Amazon systematically blocked us

亞馬遜系統性地封殺了我們

from selling the full textbook category.

從賣全本類。

We haven't sold a single book from the past 10 months,

過去10個月，我們一本書都沒賣出去。

or probably more.

或可能更多。

We were never given a reason.

我們從來沒有得到一個理由。

Amazon didn't even provide us with a notice

亞馬遜甚至沒有提供給我們一個通知。

as to why we were being restricted.

至於我們為什麼被限制。

There was no warning. There was no plan.

沒有任何警告。沒有計劃。

- She told us that they sent

- 她告訴我們，他們送

more than 500 separate communications to Amazon,

500多個單獨的通信給亞馬遜。

including to you Mr. Bezos, over the past year.

包括對你貝佐斯先生，在過去的一年裡。

There was not a single meaningful response.

沒有一個有意義的迴應。

Do you think this is an acceptable way

你覺得這樣的方式可以接受嗎？

to treat someone that you described

對待你所說的人

as both a partner and customer?

既是合作伙伴又是客戶？

- No, congresswoman. And I would like to talk to her.

- 不 國會議員我想和她談談

It does not at all to me

對我來說，它不在所有

seem like the right way to treat her.

似乎是對待她的正確方式。

- [Kelly] Wednesday's hearing

- [凱利]週三的聽證會

was really just the beginning.

其實只是一個開始。

In a few weeks, the committee will publish a final report,

幾周後，委員會將發表最後報告。

detailing how large tech firms

詳細介紹了大型科技公司如何

allegedly violate antitrust laws,

涉嫌違反反壟斷法。

and what they can do to fix these problems.

以及他們能做些什麼來解決這些問題。

By this fall, Chairman Ciciline and company

到今年秋天，西西林董事長和公司

will release that report, and the real work will begin.

將發佈該報告，並開始真正的工作。

Thinking about how Congress

思考國會如何

wants to regulate these companies,

想要監管這些公司。

or if any of them should be broken up.

或如果其中任何一個人應該被打散。

- We need to ensure the antitrust laws first written

- 我們需要確保反壟斷法首先寫出來

more than a century go work in the digital age.

一個多世紀以來，在數字時代去工作。

When these laws were written in Minneapolis

當這些法律在明尼阿波利斯制定的時候

were men named Rockefeller and Carnegie.

是叫洛克菲勒和卡內基的人。

Their controls in marketplace allowed them to do

他們在市場上的控制使他們可以做

whatever it took to crush independent businesses

不惜一切代價打壓個體工商戶

and expand their own power.

並擴大自己的勢力。

The names have changed, but the story is the same.

名字變了，但故事是一樣的。

And without objection, this hearing is adjourned.

無異議，本次聽證會休會。