This is gonna be unpopular with the most of the commenters so far…

Regardless I don’t think youtube is a monopoly.

A monopoly caries with it strict anti-competitive practices along with meddling in government affairs and great public harm. Just because something has market dominance does not make it a monopoly.

Facebook is a monopoly. Complete dominance of the entire social graph, aggressively buying competitors to silence them… direct government meddling not just in the us but abroad creating untold deaths and suffering in the process… to the point they rebrand themselves to skirt responsibility… thats a monopoly.

Live nation buying up entire cities worth of venues, artist managers, booking agents, artists themselves, ticketing, promotion companies, subsequently entire production staff, blacklisting anyone they dont like, meddling with politics, obfuscating their activities through subsidiaries, destroying entire communities and cultures in the process… thats a monopoly

Youtube could be a monopoly but I dont see them squashing their most successful creators from creating their own streaming services, I dont see them directly meddling with politics on a large scale (granted there was that time the algorithm would tend towards promoting fascism, but rather than keep that going or doubling down I see the opposite which implies active intent to the contrary), I dont see them aggressively purchasing competitors… I see them as ridiculously huge and I find their censorship annoying that if government was working I would think should be examined from a public responsibility stance but I dont see them engaged in monopolistic practices… in fact I see them actively avoiding most activities that would make them a monopoly that is of course other than being really really huge.

▲

shayway 4 days ago | parent [-]

> Just because something has market dominance does not make it a monopoly.

Isn't that the definition of a monopoly though? Just because something is a monopoly, that doesn't mean it necessarily has anti-competitive practices or meddles in government. (though that usually follows)

For what it's worth I agree that YouTube isn't abusing their market position, but it's important the semantics are clear.

	▲	wizardforhire 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I guess so, but thats the problem with language that isnt specific enough. What I feel people are discussing and what I was referring too was more properly called an illegal monopoly… technically having market domination is also a monopoly, but thats not a crime. The Hypothetical Monopolist Test is a primary method used to define relevant markets in antitrust cases. It assesses whether a hypothetical monopolist could profitably impose a small but significant and non-transitory increase in price (SSNIP). Steps in the Test Market Definition: Identify the relevant product and geographic market. Price Increase Assessment: Determine if a hypothetical monopolist could raise prices without losing too many customers. Iterative Process: If the price increase is profitable, the market is correctly defined. If not, the market definition is expanded to include substitutes. To establish a monopolization claim, two main elements must be proven: Possession of Monopoly Power: The firm must have significant and durable market power. Willful Acquisition or Maintenance: The firm must have obtained or maintained this power through improper means, rather than through competition on the merits.