[GeekyBear]

Antitrust law does not forbid a company's decision to compete in a new market.

It forbids using your existing monopoly in one market as a weapon against competitors in the new markets you choose to enter.

The conduct that was illegal here was burying their comparison shopping competitor's websites in Google search results, not "making improvements" to something.

[miki123211]

I think what GP is arguing here, and that's something I agree with, is that this wouldn't be an issue if Google shopping was available from the start.

If Google launched Shopping on the same day they launched search, they could have continued the product and it wouldn't have been an antitrust violation. However, because they changed the product and introduced Shopping when they were already large, they're being treated differently.

This approach essentially forces large companies to "calcify", because any improvement to their popular product might be seen as an antitrust violation. It also discourages an MVP approach because if you get too popular too quickly, you're limited in how your MVP can grow.

[GeekyBear]

I would agree that the behavior would not have been illegal before Google had a search monopoly that they could use as a weapon against competitors in other markets.