2 ms·

dahfizz is comparing Apple’s (allegedly) anti-competitive behavior to Microsoft’s anti-trust violations, drawing a false equivalency between to two (possibly by

by orev 4y ago

dahfizz is comparing Apple’s (allegedly) anti-competitive behavior to Microsoft’s anti-trust violations, drawing a false equivalency between to two (possibly by misunderstanding the difference). I’m clarifying the difference. Being anti-competitive is not a crime unless one is doing it as a monopoly. It doesn’t matter if Apple is a “rich market leader”. 57% does not make them a monopoly, and therefor the legal level of criminal anti-competitive behavior doesn’t apply.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago
> Being anti-competitive is not a crime unless one is doing it as a monopoly But as the person you are replying to was trying to explain this is not true. Being anticompetitive is always a crime. Regulators don’t go after small players because it’s hard to show they significantly harm the market but it is illegal at any size.