Does AWS monopolize cloud services? The complaint Parler filed in its lawsuit against AWS cites 30% market share. It also mentions they've been unable to find

Does AWS monopolize cloud services? The complaint Parler filed in its lawsuit against AWS cites 30% market share. It also mentions they've been unable to find another hosting company, though it doesn't go into why. The antitrust claim wasn't that AWS cut them off. That was the breach of contract claim. The antitrust claim was based on allegations that AWS and Twitter just did a multi-year cloud deal, and conspired to shut Parler down. Section 1 anticompetitive conduct claim. IIRC, the relevant market was microblogging, not cloud infra. The Nadler Committee report Glenn cites puts AWS at 24% of US spend and "close to half" of global spend on cloud services. US courts don't typically find "market power" below 50% in the relevant market. The concept of abusing "dominant position", mentioned over and over in the report, comes from European competition law, not US antitrust law. Anecdotally, I use cloud services and I don't use AWS at all anymore. As an attorney who advises on terms of service for cloud services, I'd also expect every major cloud platform has broad "acceptable use" or similar terms that let them refuse or terminate customers that cause more problems---law enforcement requests, law suits, marketing crises---than they're worth. A number of my cloud clients rack their own iron. Others intentionally seek out providers and services with permissive or aligned activist reputations. Those services often cost more, both because they're smaller and because they deal with more warrants, lawsuits, DMCA takedowns, &c. &c. &c. I personally prefer to patronize smaller, upstart providers. Which is only possible if you don't bite the hooks---k8s, vendor-specific APIs, and so on.