A California bill designed to stop "dominant platforms" from blocking competition just picked up support from an unexpected source: actual tech leaders. According to Slashdot, the bill has backing from entrepreneurs and investors who normally fight regulation tooth and nail.
The legislation targets anti-competitive behavior by platforms with market dominance - things like forcing developers to use proprietary payment systems, blocking competing apps, or using platform data to clone and destroy third-party features. This is aimed squarely at Apple, Google, and Meta, companies that control the platforms and compete on them simultaneously.
What makes the support interesting is that it's coming from people who've been crushed by platform power. If you've built a successful app only to watch the platform clone your core feature and bury you in search results, anti-monopoly legislation suddenly looks a lot more reasonable. If you're a payment processor getting blocked from the App Store because you compete with Apple Pay, you're probably cheering for California lawmakers.
The bill doesn't break up platforms or force divestitures. It just says: if you run the marketplace, you can't abuse that position to destroy competitors. That's a pretty modest ask, which is probably why it's getting traction from people who normally hate regulation.
The big platforms will fight this hard. Their entire business model depends on platform control - collecting 30% of transactions, forcing developers into their payment systems, and using their data advantage to enter adjacent markets. Apple will argue it's about security and user experience. Google will say competition is thriving. Meta will claim this stifles innovation.
But the economics are obvious. When you control the platform and compete on it, you have structural advantages that no amount of "innovation" can overcome. You control the rules, the visibility, and the data. Competitors aren't losing because they're worse - they're losing because the game is rigged.
