• zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s a fucking stupid lawsuit in the first place. I can think of at least 5 different pc game storefronts anybody can use

    • Rose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Can you provide a real-world example of what constitutes a monopoly in your eyes?

      • pandacoder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        11 months ago

        Locked down App Store on iOS (EU is trustbusting this one)

        Locked down PlayStation ecosystem

        Locked down Xbox ecosystem

        Locked down Switch ecosystem

        Regional monopolies by ISPs

        • Rose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          11 months ago

          So they are still not absolute in that the users still get to buy a PC or an Android phone or get satellite connectivity via a global ISP, which boils the issue down to inconvenience/cost/hardship, not the absence of alternatives.

          • pandacoder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            They are all monopolies in their ecosystem.

            (Satellite Internet doesn’t reach everywhere.)

            You got a list of monopolies, stop trying to move goalposts in order to slam Valve and defend a bunch of anti-consumer publicly traded companies.

            Standard Oil was a monopoly, but using your logic there wasn’t because there was an alternative of not using oil-based fuels.

            An example of a company that actually fits your definition of a pseudo-monopoly would be Nvidia in the GPU market.

            • Rose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              It’s the logic of the comment I responded to. The existence of this upcoming trial alone is proof that the mere presence of alternatives is not enough to claim there’s no monopoly in the relevant market.

              • pandacoder@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                The (my) comment that you responded to presented you a list of actual monopolies that have no alternatives on their platform. There was no “logic” presented, it was a statement of observation.

                The existence of the lawsuit does not mean there is proof, it means that Wolfire has enough of a case to begin discovery on two of their claims that the court is interested to find out more. That’s it.

                One of the claims is also very weird and I can’t actually find any information corroborating the claim besides the claim itself (re: Valve acquiring and shutting down World Opponent Network). The only thing I see is that Sierra was acquired by Havas who made WON into it’s own entity, then merged it with PrizeCentral under the name Flipside.com and the last WON game was released in 2006.

                The only thing relating to Valve I can see is that Valve announced Steam in 2002 and then they removed WON from their own games, which they had every right to do so.

                WG’s strongest claim is the MFN clause, and they actually have to prove that it’s for anticompetitiveness.