Any scenario where a single company controls an entire marketplace I do believe that company's markup should be limited to 5% to prevent abuse, yes. If there ar

Any scenario where a single company controls an entire marketplace I do believe that company's markup should be limited to 5% to prevent abuse, yes. If there are multiple marketplaces serving the exact same devices, and with equal status, then that's another story, and price-fixing is already illegal, so that situation is covered. Vendor-specific app stores on platforms where third party app stores are not allowed or are centrally discouraged in any way are monopolies and should be treated as such. It isn't enough to say that android apps compete with ios apps -- we aren't talking about selling iphones and android phones, we're talking about selling vendor-specific apps, and these are different ecosystems. Apple is sitting there gatekeeping everything allowed in their ecosystem and charging an extremely hefty toll, in exactly the way a monopoly prefers to, because they have made sure competition is not allowed. On that note, I also think this level of gatekeeping should not be allowed, but that's a whole other rant. There is nothing Apple (or Google, or Robolox) does to justify more than a 5% cut. 5% is generous. In many cases they don't even take the time to have a human review every submission. You can say they built the platform, but aren't we already paying for that with our 5%? And to your point, yes, when Zoomers reach 50, we'll see awesome things like companies losing the rights to their IP if they submit 3 bogus DMCA claims, extreme regulation of things like content-ID that threaten the existence of fair use in practice, outright banning of all lobbying and corporate political donations, things like this, etc etc.