3 ms·

No, this is arguably "monopolization", which is illegal under the Sherman Act. Even the 9th Circuit, which has adopted an implausibly broad reading of 230, does

No, this is arguably "monopolization", which is illegal under the Sherman Act. Even the 9th Circuit, which has adopted an implausibly broad reading of 230, does not think that 230 is a defense against antitrust claims.

sillysaurusx 4y ago
Hmm. How interesting. Monopolization, you say. I’ll have to remember that. Well, I’m just glad https://www.laarc.io https://www.laarc.io is unblocked here now after many years.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> this is arguably "monopolization", which is illegal under the Sherman Act What does Twitter have a monopoly on? Twitter users? By that definition by local dry cleaner has a monopoly on me.
- rob74 4y ago
  Do you have lots of followers at your local dry cleaner? Posted a lot of notes on their walls that people like to read?
- sillysaurusx 4y ago
  Suppose you wanted to launch a new social network. Where would you get your users? Not being able to talk about it on existing social networks is basically a death sentence for growth. I saw it first hand.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > Where would you get your users? The 80+ percent of Americans who don't use Twitter might be a start [1][2]. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2013/11/04/twitter-news-consumers-young-mobile-and-educated/ https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2013/11/04/twitter-ne... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/970911/monetizable-daily-active-twitter-users-in-the-united-states/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/970911/monetizable-daily...
    - sillysaurusx 4y ago
      Going door to door to recruit my users is an interesting idea. “Hi, I’m Shawn. I made this hacker news alternative…” It might actually work in Chicago. They had a pretty active tech scene. Covid killed those mall adventures though.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
rvz 4y ago
What "Monopolization"? Mastodon is not competing against either Facebook or Twitter. It is so remote that it has already failed after 6 years with the rate it is going and still unable to take even 10% of users from either of these platforms. The same is also true from the likes of Gab or 4chan which are also not 'competitors' or alternatives to Facebook or Twitter at this point. It is really not early days for either of these 'alternatives'.
bee_rider 4y ago
The word monopoly unfortunately invites all sorts of pedantry about whether a company is a monopoly (and it goes on endlessly because people can play a game of quibbling about exactly what 'the market' is). Twitter is obviously a powerful player in the social media market, whether or not it is a monopoly. You don't need to be a monopoly to engage in anti-competitive behavior.
- legalcorrection 4y ago
  Yes, it is often pedantry and not offered in good faith, but in fairness, the legal definition of "monopolization" requires that you either have a monopoly (defined, loosely, as a high-enough marketshare), or, if accused of "attempted monopolization", that you have a dangerous chance of achieving a monopoly. As you note, that requires defining the "relevant market."
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    I guess I just find it annoying that people want to quibble about "relevant markets" and that kind of stuff, when they could clear up the more likely confusion, which is basically just vocabulary, instead.

sillysaurusx 4y ago

Hmm. How interesting. Monopolization, you say. I’ll have to remember that. Well, I’m just glad https://www.laarc.io https://www.laarc.io is unblocked here now after many years.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> this is arguably "monopolization", which is illegal under the Sherman Act What does Twitter have a monopoly on? Twitter users? By that definition by local dry cleaner has a monopoly on me.

rob74 4y ago
Do you have lots of followers at your local dry cleaner? Posted a lot of notes on their walls that people like to read?
sillysaurusx 4y ago
Suppose you wanted to launch a new social network. Where would you get your users? Not being able to talk about it on existing social networks is basically a death sentence for growth. I saw it first hand.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > Where would you get your users? The 80+ percent of Americans who don't use Twitter might be a start [1][2]. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2013/11/04/twitter-news-consumers-young-mobile-and-educated/ https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2013/11/04/twitter-ne... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/970911/monetizable-daily-active-twitter-users-in-the-united-states/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/970911/monetizable-daily...
  - sillysaurusx 4y ago
    Going door to door to recruit my users is an interesting idea. “Hi, I’m Shawn. I made this hacker news alternative…” It might actually work in Chicago. They had a pretty active tech scene. Covid killed those mall adventures though.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

rvz 4y ago

What "Monopolization"? Mastodon is not competing against either Facebook or Twitter. It is so remote that it has already failed after 6 years with the rate it is going and still unable to take even 10% of users from either of these platforms. The same is also true from the likes of Gab or 4chan which are also not 'competitors' or alternatives to Facebook or Twitter at this point. It is really not early days for either of these 'alternatives'.

bee_rider 4y ago

The word monopoly unfortunately invites all sorts of pedantry about whether a company is a monopoly (and it goes on endlessly because people can play a game of quibbling about exactly what 'the market' is). Twitter is obviously a powerful player in the social media market, whether or not it is a monopoly. You don't need to be a monopoly to engage in anti-competitive behavior.

legalcorrection 4y ago
Yes, it is often pedantry and not offered in good faith, but in fairness, the legal definition of "monopolization" requires that you either have a monopoly (defined, loosely, as a high-enough marketshare), or, if accused of "attempted monopolization", that you have a dangerous chance of achieving a monopoly. As you note, that requires defining the "relevant market."
- bee_rider 4y ago
  I guess I just find it annoying that people want to quibble about "relevant markets" and that kind of stuff, when they could clear up the more likely confusion, which is basically just vocabulary, instead.