3 ms·
Yes, these are all good examples of things that actually shouldn't be done, under a certain interpretation of law. They are perfectly reasonable under a certai
by nonrandomstring 2y ago
Yes, these are all good examples of things that actually shouldn't be
done, under a certain interpretation of law.
They are perfectly reasonable under a certain interpretation of
monopoly. It's just that the US definition and that in Europe (and
elsewhere) differ quite profoundly.
United States anti-trust revolves around the idea of harms. You have
to show that Mr Moneybag's empire causes material harm to customers -
such as paying more than they could in a more efficient market.
The European (and it seems Japanese) take is directed at power. Even
if it benefits consumers it's wrong to leverage dominance in one area
to obtain power in another.