As predominantly a device manufacturer, there are justifiable concerns about some aspects of Apple’s business – above all the 30pc “Apple tax” charged to third-party app developers on the App Store. But this could be remedied easily without resorting to a break-up.
Critics have, in the past, proposed that Amazon be forced to spin off its profitable cloud computing arm, Amazon Web Services (AWS). But that would still leave its huge retail and logistics business as a standalone company, generating vast amounts of cash.
In any case, Amazon also argues – persuasively – that it accounts for less than 1pc of the $25 trillion global retail market and less than 4pc of retail in the US, where its biggest rival Wal-Mart has more than twice its revenues. On what legal grounds could such a company be broken up? Amazon’s lawyers would have a field day.
Again, many of the criticisms levelled at Amazon – such as the accusation it glugs down the data of third-party sellers on its platform to help it launch rival products – could be remedied without a break-up by simply outlawing such practices and toughening up the rules.
Google, with 87pc share of the internet search market, and Facebook, with which it shares a 70pc duopoly over online advertising, arguably offer a closer and better comparison with the monopoly held by Standard Oil.
Both companies comprise individual businesses – like Google’s YouTube or Facebook’s Instagram and WhatsApp – which could in theory be hived off. Then again, many of the biggest problems posed by these companies in truth have little to do with antitrust.
Critics worry about the role they play in violating our privacy, hoovering up data and tracking our activities on the web, fuelling the spread of lies and misinformation and in enabling online harassment.
In the UK, meanwhile, US tech giants have come under fire for the comparatively tiny amounts of tax they pay.