Point 1: while I agree with the general idea, it’s a little annoying to see a reasonable argument undercutting itself by mixing together unrelated stuff and in an inconsistent way. Example:

  • Amazon: the ‘issues’ listed have nothing to do with antitrust investigations. The ‘aggressive use of non-compete’ was signed off by a judge, so the simple fact that a company uses well written (as far as non-compete goes) isn’t an issue by any measure, their use of dominant position means effectively they can influence a judge (somehow), which is a matter for the FBI. Bullying smaller brands has nothing to do with the questions asked. You are asking if Amazon improperly favours own products as opposed to the quoted source which says that Amazon is pressuring brands into using services on the platform that some brands simply don’t want (or can’t afford the cost of).

--

--

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store