4 ms·

> In the age of antitrust, why has Koala Kare, Big Baby Change Station, flown under the radar? Proportionality, it seems. Why has nobody sued the printer ink m

> In the age of antitrust, why has Koala Kare, Big Baby Change Station, flown under the radar? Proportionality, it seems. Why has nobody sued the printer ink monopolists? Because compared to Google or Apple they're somewhat of a lesser evil.

1propionyl 2y ago
Same with Crayola. The reality is that Koala Kare and Crayola simply do not affect people's lives as much as tech giants on the list (Amazon and Apple), or CPGs like Hershey's candy bars or Gatorade beverages. To put a finer colored wax point on it: my crayon doesn't have access to my entire online life or my shopping habits, and I have no effective societal obligation to own Crayola crayons.
- drbig 2y ago
  > and I have no effective societal obligation to own Crayola crayons. Thanks for that insight. "Vote with your wallet" and similar responses seem to die under the actual, practical, reality of exclusion and/or lack of access.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ascorbic 2y ago
  > my crayon doesn't have access to my entire online life or my shopping habits, and I have no effective societal obligation to own Crayola crayons. Those have only really become an aspect of antitrust cases in the past decade though
  - 1propionyl 2y ago
    Railroad, telecom, and oil monopolies of their time had their own analogue forms of reach into everyday life in ways crayons did/do not.
pessimizer 2y ago
Because it's not the age of antitrust, and nothing has been broken up? Lina Khan trying her best does not an age of antitrust make. It's an age of unprecedented concentration of ownership with attendant open and unashamed market manipulation, which of course makes people talk about antitrust more, while also having absolutely no mechanism to do anything about it, which makes them talk about it with a tone of frustration and anger. But frustration and anger does not break up companies. Functioning governments do.
- ascorbic 2y ago
  Yeah, it's not an age of antitrust – it's an age of monopoly
rsynnott 2y ago
Eh. At least based on the article, they don’t seem that abusive. The printer ink thing actually is, but as alluded to in the article, we’re in an age of fairly minimalist anti-trust enforcement (this is maybe _beginning_ to change; the EC has been getting more aggressive for the last couple of decades, and the US authorities finally seem to be waking up a bit, but it’s early days and from a low base). Even in an environment of robust enforcement you probably wouldn’t expect that this company would face difficulties, but the printer people might well.

1propionyl 2y ago

Same with Crayola. The reality is that Koala Kare and Crayola simply do not affect people's lives as much as tech giants on the list (Amazon and Apple), or CPGs like Hershey's candy bars or Gatorade beverages. To put a finer colored wax point on it: my crayon doesn't have access to my entire online life or my shopping habits, and I have no effective societal obligation to own Crayola crayons.

drbig 2y ago
> and I have no effective societal obligation to own Crayola crayons. Thanks for that insight. "Vote with your wallet" and similar responses seem to die under the actual, practical, reality of exclusion and/or lack of access.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ascorbic 2y ago
> my crayon doesn't have access to my entire online life or my shopping habits, and I have no effective societal obligation to own Crayola crayons. Those have only really become an aspect of antitrust cases in the past decade though
- 1propionyl 2y ago
  Railroad, telecom, and oil monopolies of their time had their own analogue forms of reach into everyday life in ways crayons did/do not.

pessimizer 2y ago

Because it's not the age of antitrust, and nothing has been broken up? Lina Khan trying her best does not an age of antitrust make. It's an age of unprecedented concentration of ownership with attendant open and unashamed market manipulation, which of course makes people talk about antitrust more, while also having absolutely no mechanism to do anything about it, which makes them talk about it with a tone of frustration and anger. But frustration and anger does not break up companies. Functioning governments do.

ascorbic 2y ago
Yeah, it's not an age of antitrust – it's an age of monopoly

rsynnott 2y ago

Eh. At least based on the article, they don’t seem that abusive. The printer ink thing actually is, but as alluded to in the article, we’re in an age of fairly minimalist anti-trust enforcement (this is maybe _beginning_ to change; the EC has been getting more aggressive for the last couple of decades, and the US authorities finally seem to be waking up a bit, but it’s early days and from a low base). Even in an environment of robust enforcement you probably wouldn’t expect that this company would face difficulties, but the printer people might well.