In general, you cannot commit antitrust violations against the monopoly player (well, unless you're abusing your monopoly position in a related market, but in t

In general, you cannot commit antitrust violations against the monopoly player (well, unless you're abusing your monopoly position in a related market, but in that case it's the market where you have the monopoly that gives you the ability to commit the antitrust violations). That said, the DoJ has in more recent times taken the opinion that anything that lowers prices for consumers is implicitly good and anything that raises prices is implicitly bad and used this as the basis for leveraging antitrust complaints against companies that were not in fact the monopoly. In particular I'm thinking about how the monopoly player in ebooks (Amazon) successfully convinced the DoJ to sue the brand new entrant (Apple) because what Apple was doing was causing problems for Amazon's strategy of artificially pricing books lower than they should be in a fair market (even though what Amazon was doing is literally a monopolistic tactic intended to cement a monopoly and prevent anyone from competing, which leads to raising prices down the road once you're sure the competition is gone, i.e. Amazon successfully convinced the DoJ to use antitrust laws to help Amazon cement their monopoly). But since Epic isn't raising prices for games, that doesn't really apply here.