He confused a pure monopoly with monopoly power.
The UK regulators consider that if two firms combine to create a market share of 25% or more of a specific market, the merger may be referred to the Competition Commission ( formerly called the monopoly and mergers commission ) , and may be prohibited.
I do not see how that really applies here in UK as MS is not a British Company. Even the EU tried to take them on demanding N versions be made available. The EU won inasmuch it forced a choice but most companies just ignored it.
The US have split up companies that had a virtual stranglehold on the world as a result of the Sherman anti-trust laws (over 100 years old)
The most notable case in history was when the US split up the original Rockefeller oil company "Standard Oil" into the "Seven Sisters"
Esso, Gulf, Texaco, Chevron, Mobil, Shell and BP.
But how does that apply to technical companies:
This is an interesting read:-
The antitrust legacy of Standard Oil, after the breakup of the company 110 years ago, continues to impact the American judicial system’s treatment of antitrust actions against companies even today.
jpt.spe.org
particularly
"Today, the companies of Big Tech (a nebulous term, but often understood to include Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google at the least) face a similar backlash, or colloquially, “
techlash” over their various perceived monopolies. However, Big Tech is not a monopoly
per se, that is, the companies comprising Big Tech have not agreed to cooperate rather than compete, to their benefit and market detriment. In fact, in recent years they have started attempting to step on each other’s toes in some arenas (e.g., cloud computing services)."
"The other existing interpretation of the Sherman Act under which they might be dissolved, the “rule of reason” used to measure and divide Standard Oil, has also failed to flag Big Tech as monopolistic, despite clear dominance in various market sectors and some arguably anticompetitive practices (e.g., Facebook’s purchase of Instagram and WhatsApp or the Apple App Store’s requirements and fees). This market dominance was achieved predominately through superior service and/or significant benefits from network effects. And because many of the services are provided to the consumer free in return for the ability to advertise to them and utilize personal data, consumers are not being harmed by artificially inflated prices."
My layman's conclusion is US will really only do anything meaty if the near monopolies are counter to US National and International interests, as was certainly the case a hundred+ years ago with Standard Oil (or of course if public "anger" affect their votes LOL).
As the old Brit joke goes "How come there is only one Monopolies andMergers commission?" - LOL.
