It's a good idea and a systemic nudge towards the outcome we want. (Probably minimum 3 large competitors in every market) Market definition should be tied to r

It's a good idea and a systemic nudge towards the outcome we want. (Probably minimum 3 large competitors in every market) Market definition should be tied to revenue source. It'd be difficult, but doesn't seem insurmountable. The Android/iPhone problem is somewhat of a unique case, given mobile's size. IMHO "unreasonable to non-monopolize" should be an option... but come with FRAND interconnection requirements as a consequence of designation (e.g. Android/iPhone both have to offer the ability for other apps stores to be implemented, and can only charge those stores FRAND fees) And novelty / new markets could be solved by progressively implementing the tax rate increases as the market matures (e.g. first 5 years).