Hilarious. You're assuming the DOJ is actually trying to prevent monopolies; it seems to me their main motivation is responding to pressure from Congress and co

Hilarious. You're assuming the DOJ is actually trying to prevent monopolies; it seems to me their main motivation is responding to pressure from Congress and corporate lobbyists. If Apple were called into their offices to defend their market share, they would say something like "we have .001 percent of the mobile devices market. This market includes anything with a wireless connection, like laptops and all cellular phones." The DOJ would say "Ok, sounds good to us. No monopoly issues here." (Unless, of course, some powerful Congressperson was pounding on them, trying to cause headaches for Apple..) As an example, the DOJ just let the only two satellite radio companies merge (Sirius and XM). They allowed them to define the market as "anything that can broadcast music". The market included all normal over-the-air radio stations, internet radio, and (for all I know) iTunes. By that definition, XM and Sirius only owned .01% of the "anything that can broadcast" market, so there were no antitrust issues. I got a personal look at this when I sold my last company; we were bought by a competitor and the DOJ called us in to evaluate the merger and determine whether there were any anti-trust issues. We defined the market in the broadest terms possible and got absolutely no resistance from them. (Granted, even had we defined the market in narrow terms we still should have been ok.) To this day I'm amazed at how tractable they were. The system is broken.