Start with the Sherman act and then see that "what antitrust means" has had a long, changing history. By the way, the European understanding of antitrust still includes harm to competition as well, which often pops up on HN (e.g. how does Facebook's action harm consumers? That was not the question!).

Yet, you have lots of people in this thread claim that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

>This law aims to promote fair competition and prevent unfair business practices that could harm consumers. It prohibits certain actions that might restrict competition, like tying agreements, predatory pricing, and mergers that could lessen competition.

>The Antitrust Division enforces federal antitrust and competition laws. These laws prohibit anticompetitive conduct and mergers that deprive American consumers, taxpayers, and workers of the benefits of competition.

Both are aimed squarely at consumer benefit. Restrictions on anticompetitive behaviour and mergers *where those things impact consumer benefit.*.

Mergers and actions against competitors are obviously allowed in the normal course of business.

Lots of people have other ideas about what kind of antitrust law they'd like to see, but such a law has not passed the US Congress.

https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-laws-and-you#:~:text=T....

“Taxpayers” is an extremely broad category as well, though you need an appetite for it to argue through that clause.

Though I think you can easily make a consumer argument for Chrome being unbundled (competition for Chromes default search engine pick)

Monetizing browsers requires either subscriptions or (further) enshittification of the web experience. Forcing /market/ competition into the space will not be great for consumers, IMO.

Perhaps some antitrust action would help with this.

So, it's plainly written - ations don't have to actually harm consumers, the fact they could do so is enough - and the key criteria is that they might restrict competition.

You paraphrased incorrectly. The correct paraphrasing would be, “Restrictions on anticompetitive behaviour and mergers where those things deprive consumers of the benefits of competition.”

Competition is the heart, NOT consumer benefit.