I am refuting the statement "A monopoly should be defined by barriers to entry, not just market share." made by sfrank2147, specifically interpreted as "barriers of entry for search market", which are surprisingly high. Based on his definition, Google is deep into monopoly territory.

What a monopoly really is and whether Google qualifies is a separate question, and I'm recusing myself from commenting on this point.

> Just because it is expensive and technically hard doesn't mean Google is preventing them in any way.

I agree. It means it's a natural monopoly. These should be regulated, because otherwise there is a tendency for them to abuse their power.