I was pointing out that your claim of monopoly is irrelevant for the question, though. You can totally be found guilty of antitrust without having or abusing a

I was pointing out that your claim of monopoly is irrelevant for the question, though. You can totally be found guilty of antitrust without having or abusing a monopoly. As evidenced by Apple on multiple occasions. If you are arguing that those decisions were wrong, good luck with that. They lost handily in both of the cited cases I picked. Again, I'm only stating that antitrust is not completely defined by monopoly. That is just the one people think they understand the most.