The driving news: The United States Supreme Court has ruled on Monday that a type of action suit users charging Apple's App Store with monopolistic behavior may be moving forward .
The big picture: is very important in antitrust battles.
- Say that you're running the only restaurant in town – do you have a monopoly?
- If the market is referred to as "restaurants" or "dining out," do it.
- If the market is referred to as "food" or "food," well, people can buy groceries and cook, right?
In the App Store app suit users are charging Apple, by forcing developers to sell iPhone apps by just storefront and getting Apple a cut of sales that is, milling of prices.
If you refer the market as "iPhone apps," Apple looks at a lot like a monopolist – it maintains complete control over space.
- You will not be able to put an App that is not an App Store on an iPhone without this "jail-breaking", tampering with the operating system in a way that violates Apple's terms and removes the guarantee.
Instead of identifying the market as, say, "smartphone apps," you'll get another outcome.
- That's because users are free to buy Android phones and access a very different universe of apps. Users have a pre-election option, no monopoly.
Both principles apply to the debate over breaking Facebook.
- In his recent narrative arguing that Facebook has become very strong, co-founder Chris Hughes argued that the company "is a powerful monopoly, eclipsing all its rivals and firing competition from the social networking category."  "The social networking category" is a way to identify this market that is easiest to deploy on Facebook as a monopoly.
- But if you call it "messaging," then Apple, Snapchat, and cellphone providers seem to be healthy competitors.
Similarly, in many countries, Google looks like a monopoly in the search market. But if you are referring to the market rather than "online information," the case is much murkier.
- Google's Android practices also exit antitrust learning. Last year, an EU decision to punish Google for practices involving the Android Play Store has revealed that Google has a monopoly in that market.
Our thinking bubble : In tech, market definitions are not usually interrupted because hardware is rapidly changing and the software is endlessly malleable.
- Lawsuits and antitrust cases are slowly moving, and at the time they can be tested, the markets tend to have mutated.
- But the power of tech giants has grown so many critics have seen antitrust remedies as the only way to rebalance the game industry.