I agree that negative intent from a monopoly power is actionable. I merely point out that negative intent is not necessary prior to regulatory action against or upon a monopoly power. I refer to another comment on this post for further info.
‘Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.’
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23198343
"Market Power"
‘Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.’
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...