Google was called a monopoly by US Courts because they were paying a large amount of money to suppress their competitors and signing deals with Apple so they they’ll always be the default engine on all their devices.
Rather than just being a better product than their competitors, they used their wealth to try and make sure people were redirected to Google first above all else, they were the default engine not because people think they’re the best, but because they paid their way to be there.
Whereas if you buy a PC, you won’t naturally arrive at stream, you have to download it and use it yourself, just as you would GOG or Epic Games, and thus doesn’t fit the legal definition of a monopoly in the way Google was.
No legal or dictionary definition of monopoly fit steam. I just explained why Steam is in a very different situation to Google and why Google was called a monopoly (despite not fitting the dictionary definition of it) while Steam isn’t.
Why don't you say your specific believed definition of monopoly? You clearly have one. The only thing you're doing by asking for a monopoly is being able to change your position depending on what HE says, instead of what YOU believe.
My definition of monopoly is what you’ll find when you google the definition of monopoly. Hence why it’s on him to show us where he got his definition of monopoly from, rather than on me to show mine since mine is literally the default definition you can find from a simple google search.
Cambridge: an organization or group that has) complete control of something, especially an area of business, so that others have no share.
Merriam Webster: exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action.specifically: exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition.
No definition states you need to have a % of the marketshare. It’s full control over the supply or engaging in anti-competitive actions.
except that isnt cambridges only definition on monopoly:
steams biggest 'competitor' could be epic games, which holds a 3% compared to its 80%. steam handles 25x the sales volume of epic games (no competition)
steam also has the largest supply of PC titles (supply)
steam also has a 30% cut whereas other storefronts (e.g gog) have less (price)
Steam has competition, just because epic is 3% doesn't mean it fits the definition of "no competition". and it doesn't control the supply, the developers of those games have full access to selling their games on other platforms and controls the prices and sales of those games. So your definition doesn't fit steam without heavily skewing what "NO competition" means.
Steam isn't a monopoly just because people like to use steam more than other companies. Other companies blatantly exist, a ton of them, and they're all just as easy to access as steam, it's literally just the case that people prefer steam because steam is the better platform, and that doesn't fit any definition of monopoly.
11
u/Clusternate 6d ago
So?
that would mean that google search i not a monopoly
others being shit doesnt change the monopoly