That’s promising, and I like that it explicitly applies to large online platforms. That said, > allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own

That’s promising, and I like that it explicitly applies to large online platforms. That said, > allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations With “certain specific situations” presumably they are trying to make it viable for a monopoly to innovate, but as is it’s open to interpretation and may just result in platforms innovating specifically to maintain monopoly and the double-market scenario where they sell to advertisers and only care about users insofar as their eyeballs don’t leave en masse. IMO a good law would specifically aim to make it infeasible to operate as a double-sided market and pretend to offer a free product to the users while actually being supported by advertisers. I suspect this can only be achieved by an all-encompassing interoperation requirement (a.k.a. open API). In this document, however, “interoperability” seems to mean hardware and OS (?).