Re:Dear Apple: Your Services Are No Longer Required
by ouid on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @02:25PM
(#24202286)
obviously TOS written by companies wielding monopoly power are bullshit. We've just defined monopoly too narrowly in the law. Is it possible for me to obtain an equivalent product from a competing company? If the answer is no, then you are a monopoly. If your product is not interoperable with other products that you are claiming equivalence with, then your claims at equivalence are invalid.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Dear Apple: Your Services Are No Longer Required
by dathinab on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @02:53PM
(#24202680)
I believe monopoly laws should apply to any companies having a "few million" customers and it not being trivial for customers to switch or there not being much choice to switch to.
In case of Apple it's neither trivial to switch (you can't move bought apps over) nor is there much choice (in practice it's basically Apple or Google).
Re:Dear Apple: Your Services Are No Longer Required
by ouid on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @03:21PM
(#24203109)
I have thought pretty hard about the need to include a fuzzy word like equivalence in my definition of monopoly, what would it take for me to persuade you to adopt my definition?
Re:Dear Apple: Your Services Are No Longer Required
by paulchap on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @05:21PM
(#24204496)
By that logic, wouldn't any company inventing/developing a new technology be forming a monopoly?