Not necessarily - as it is written, the Sherman anti-trust act and all of the amendments distinguishes between "innocent" and "coercive" monopolies. But the definitions are very loose and hard to pin down.
It's hard to even consistently distinguish a monopoly - is it market share? Earning power? Barriers to entry?
> It's hard to even consistently distinguish a monopoly - is it market share? Earning power? Barriers to entry?
"I know it when I see it," as it is difficult at best to rely on distinctive actions or indicators considering the fluidity of business dynamics and the market landscape.
As soon as they formalized a metric to distinguish a monopoly, it would become something deliberately managed by entities who wished to wield monopolistic power.
It would change the shape, but not the definition.
Does Nvidia negotiate deals for all gaming + crypto + AI companies to use their cards, or do they just provide good hardware + software that consumers want to use?
That would be the difference of an anti-competition monopoly vs just a monopoly.
