[codersarepeople]

But Amazon doesn't have anywhere close to a monopoly on retail? There are many more options for retail, in particular buying a HDD, than there are for search. And while it's clear that Amazon does engage in some anti-competitive behavior, the pricing you complain about doesn't really have to do with Amazon; the seller set that price, not Amazon.

[grumple]

Not all monopolies are unlawful, and not all laws regarding anti trust require a monopoly.

[ShamelessC]

Still trying to grasp what is legally considered a monopoly in this country. I've come to consider it as "market leader of a sufficiently large market with a history of anti-competitive practices." Is that essentially accurate?

[grumple]

No. Again, you can have a monopoly and not be breaking any laws. Being a monopoly is not illegal. Being an uncompetitive monopoly is. [1] But it is also illegal to engage in anti competitive behavior even if you don’t have a literal monopoly. [2]

“Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.” [1]

1. https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

2. https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/anticompetitive-practices