>The mere fact of it being better or open doesn't make what Google is doing any less of an abuse of their position.
Except it literaly does. Abuse in the market it not defined by the loss of another company but by the loss of the consumer. Anti-competition laws are ultimately meant to protect the consumer. The consumer. "Abusing" a company in itself is perfectly fine: it's a free market after all.
Abuse of dominance occurs when a dominant business (or group of businesses) engages in activity that stops or substantially reduces competition in a market. These anti-competitive activities may be:
predatory (incurring short-term losses to eliminate a competitor and gain future market power);
exclusionary (trying to prevent a business from operating in a market);
disciplinary (trying to punish a business); or
intended to adversely affect competition (e.g., by making other companies want to compete less and denying consumers the benefit of competition)
Or else they wouldn't get Youtube, or get Android, or both etc.
> As you say, hardware manufacturers are holding back codec progress.
Google: releases several codecs in quick succession
Google: uses dominant market position to force everyone to adopt these codecs [1]
HN: Why do device manufacturers stifle progress?
> it's not abuse because it's a better and open standard.
The mere fact of it being better or open doesn't make what Google is doing any less of an abuse of their position.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33285373