I agree with the author in all points he made. But his advices sound to me like he is "preaching to the converted". I don't see a judge or a regulator reading t

I agree with the author in all points he made. But his advices sound to me like he is "preaching to the converted". I don't see a judge or a regulator reading this and considering it a new point of view that may change his analysis of future cases. I imagine that these regulators already have "the focus on customers". And if they don't, it is not because they don't know they should have. Give the "benefit of the doubt" to innovation? Why? "Keep an open mind"? "Use the service"? I don't see any of these arguments as particularly relevant to anyone in power to regulate these markets. I think we (those who stand with innovation) should pay more attention and think harder on our arguments in order to win those battelgrounds.