3 ms·
That seems like monopolistic behavior on Unity's part. Wouldn't this action run afoul of antitrust laws?
by CaliforniaKarl 3y ago
That seems like monopolistic behavior on Unity's part. Wouldn't this action run afoul of antitrust laws?
- drexlspivey 3y ago30% market share is not a monopoly
- charonn0 3y agoAntitrust laws prohibit anti-competitive practices generally, not just literal monopolies.
- cratermoon 3y agoUnity itself claims more than 70% of the top mobile games in the market. https://unity.com/solutions/mobile https://unity.com/solutions/mobile
- __loam 3y agoYou can still break anti-trust laws even with a 30% market share.
- iaw 3y agoLets call it as it is, an oligopoly share.
- badRNG 3y agoTypically antitrust laws apply to a company using a monopoly in one industry to behave anti-competitively in another. Unity is behaving terribly, but they aren't a monopoly, and this isn't really even anti-competitive, it's just shitty. There's a greater case that they aren't properly representing the fiduciary interests of their shareholders.
- cratermoon 3y agoIn this case, it seems that they are wanting to leverage Unity's dominance in mobile gaming as a way to out-compete rivals in the mobile advertising space. Questions for lawyers: Is Unity's share (more than 70% of the top mobile games in the market) large enough to be a monopoly? Is this move to displace rivals in advertising behaving anti-competitively?