Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Some of these are a bit different in scope to some of your points, but here a few things I believe aren't really covered:

Predatory hiring: Hiring key employees from competitors primarily to weaken them rather than to benefit from the employees' skills.

Patent abuse: Using a large portfolio of patents to stifle competition rather than to protect legitimate innovations.

Regulatory capture: Using influence to shape regulations in ways that benefit the monopolist and create barriers for potential competitors.

Killer acquisitions: Buying potential competitors primarily to eliminate future competition rather than to integrate their technology or talent.

Data hoarding: In digital markets, collecting and refusing to share data that is crucial for competitors to enter or compete effectively in the market.

Self-preferencing: In platform markets, giving preferential treatment to one's own products or services over those of competitors.

Vaporware: Announcing nonexistent or deliberately suboptimal products or features to discourage customers from switching to competitors' existing products.



Most of these don't make much sense:

Predatory hiring - banning this would be preventing competition in the labor market and be extremely bad for workers. Also unproveable.

Regulatory capture - the government regulators are not going to sue themselves

Killer acquisitions - already illegal to engage in acquisition to form monopoly

Data hoarding - the government can't force you to share things for free. That violates the takings clause

Self-preferencing - this is such a long standing and legally permitted practice that it is not plausible to make illegal. e.g. every grocery store has a store brand that they favor.

Vaporware - if this is a provable lie it is already covered by fraud statutes, and it would be such a stupid move by the company that I don't believe it actually happens


> Also unproveable.

No? I'm always surprised by what corporate chats and emails reveal.


> what the DoJ views unfavorably in this arena

I think he meant to add `...for anti-trust purposes`

Data and acquisitions (and maybe platforming) might be considered under anti-trust. Others not so much.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: