With that decision they aimed a very big gun straight at their foot and pulled the trigger. They proved: 1. That they are in a monopoly-like position where the

With that decision they aimed a very big gun straight at their foot and pulled the trigger. They proved: 1. That they are in a monopoly-like position where they have the power to decide over other web tech projects 2. That they have a very hostile process, not getting properly back to the developer for months. That alone is sabotaging of other projects. 3. That they make the wrong decision, seemingly only protecting their own position, without providing a proper reasoning. Hear that? That was the antitrust investigator laughing. You can do that if it's about some random tech. You can't do that if the tech is linked to a browser controlling how 60% of internet users access the web, and worse, getting full access to popular stuff/success qualifying content like Netflix for all browser. They wanted that monopoly position when they pushed for DRM, now they have to handle it. Big mistake.