Re:Germany orders changes to Facebook real name policy
by marknutter on Tuesday December 18, 2012 @11:07AM
(#4938069)
But people always have control over a company, even if that company has a monopoly. They can simply not buy the company's product or service, or use an alternate product or service. It may not be as good as the one offered by the monopoly, but no company is forcing people to pay them for their goods and services. In fact, the only entity that is forcing people to pay them for the goods and services they provide is the government.
Re:Germany orders changes to Facebook real name policy
by chmod775 on Tuesday December 18, 2012 @11:20AM
(#4938136)
The very definition of monopoly is that there is no alternative. I can't just go to another company because they, for instance, do not have the people I'd like to connect with in their network.
Re:Germany orders changes to Facebook real name policy
by marknutter on Tuesday December 18, 2012 @11:32AM
(#4938201)
You can choose not to social network if Facebook is the only social network. That is clearly an "alternative".
That aside.
There's a huge difference between a company and a government. Because I only get to decide on the politics of the latter. But luckily my government has jurisdiction over companies operating in the country in question, giving me also some power over them.
So. To make this clear: A government having control over people without the people having control over it: A potential problem. A company having a monopoly and therefore control over people without the people having control over it: A potential problem.
Luckily the people get to control the first, which in turn has control over the latter.