Parallels could be drawn with Amazon and AWS's dominance.
Yes they do. The reason MS got put on the chopping block was because they began telling vendors that they would charge them more if they bundled Netscape or Java. Intel got slapped with a similar suite when they began telling vendors that they would charge more for their chips if they sold any configuration with AMD chips. Similarly Standard Oil did the same thing - once they began telling suppliers they would squeeze them out if they worked with any competitors they got broken up.
It's simply not enough to have a dominant position - you have to abuse it to get slapped with an anti trust suite.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23198343
"Market Power"
‘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...
Besides that, Amazon itself admits that only 5% of Enterprise workloads are on any cloud platform.
Any company - or heck most tech nerds - can build our infrastructure to suit their needs without going to managed services. Whether they should is based on their business model.
Before anyone tries to “educate me” about what AWS offers, I know the ins and outs of AWS.
Of course it may not be prudent to go after a company that isn't doing any malicious against its competitors.
What would the punishment even be? Forcing adoption of other platforms to artificially inflate usage rates? Breaking Google Search into two competing Google Mini-Search products that aren't expected to cooperate and push search #3 and onward out of the market?
It’s probably about Google stifling competitors on their own search results page.
Yelp has complained forever that Google ranks their own reviews above Yelp.
Things like that.
Not principally:
Much of the states’ investigation has focused on Google’s online advertising business. The company owns the dominant tool at every link in the complex chain between online publishers and advertisers. The Justice Department likewise is making Google’s ad technology one of its points of emphasis. But it is also focusing more broadly on concerns that Google uses its dominant search business to stifle competition, people familiar with the matter said.
From TFA.