• magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    In what way are they sacrificing their monopoly? There’s no viable alternative to n YouTube.

    They also restricted IE6 when it was far more dominant than Firefox is today (and when YouTube was far less dominant), so it’s not completely unheard of.

    • Chreutz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      But using the dominance of YouTube to influence the browser market is textbook anticompetitive, painting a huge target on themselves for regulators.

      • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        They can probably find loop holes, like saying they do support many alternative browsers like Edge, Safari, Opera, Vivaldi, Brave, etc. . They just don’t want “insecure” and “outdated” browsers that support terrible stuff like ad blocking, but they can agree to support Firefox if Mozilla takes action to prevent “insecure” extensions like ad blocking.