News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AMP for email is a terrible idea. Parent comment

Re:AMP for email is a terrible idea by ams6110 on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @09:11AM (#16375779)
Do you have an economic or legal reference for that definition of "monopoly"?

Since search engines are all free to use, many of the criteria of a monopoly seem hard to apply, but the classic defintions I'm familiar with include things such as "no reasonable substitute" which is not the case for Google Search.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMP for email is a terrible idea by icebraining on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @11:15AM (#16376865)
Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMP for email is a terrible idea by bluGill on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @01:03PM (#16377775)
From wikipedia The lowest yet market share of a company considered "dominant" in the EU was 39.7%

Google is dominate for sure.

[ Parent | on HN ]