"Many of the most important antitrust lawsuits in American history — against IBM, Alcoa, Kodak and others — were rooted in claims that one company had made technological discoveries that allowed it to outpace competitors."

Does that say more about the success of antitrust at spurring competitors to catch up or that "technological dominance" is only good as long as long as the paradigm doesn't shift (i.e. Kodak is now pretending to be a crypto company as a last resort)?