Editing Vendor lock-in (section)

=== Collective vendor lock-in ===
There exist lock-in situations that are both monopolistic and collective. Having the worst of two worlds, these can be very hard to escape — in many examples, the cost to resist incurs some level of isolation from the (dominating technology in) society, which can be socially costly, yet direct competition with the dominant vendor is hindered by compatibility.

As one blogger expressed:<ref>{{cite web |title=Top 10 reasons I hate Skype |url=http://www.dgeex.de/2015/04/04/top-10-reasons-i-hate-skype/ |website=dgeex.de |access-date=2015-04-26 |date=2015-04-04 |archive-date=2015-04-29 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150429114521/http://www.dgeex.de/2015/04/04/top-10-reasons-i-hate-skype/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>

{{Blockquote|text=If I stopped using Skype, I'd lose contact with many people, because it's impossible to make them all change to ''[other]'' software.}}

While [[MP3]] is patent-free as of 2017, in 2001 it was both patented and entrenched, as noted by [[Richard Stallman]] in that year (in justifying a lax license for [[Vorbis|Ogg Vorbis]]):<ref name="rms-ov-license" />

{{Blockquote|text=there is […] the danger that people will settle on MP3 format even though it is patented, and we won't be *allowed* to write free encoders for the most popular format. […] Ordinarily, if someone decides not to use a copylefted program because the license doesn't please him, that's his loss not ours. But if he rejects the Ogg/Vorbis code because of the license, and uses MP3 instead, then the problem rebounds on us—because his continued use of MP3 may help MP3 to become and stay entrenched.}}

More examples:
*[[Proprietary file format]]s that have become widespread on the [[World Wide Web|Web]]: examples include [[GIF]] (patent expired), [[Adobe Flash]] and [[Advanced Video Coding|H.264]].
* Communication services that require membership with the same vendor as the communication partner: Unlike [[Telecommunications company|telephone service providers]] or [[Mailbox provider|email service providers]], which enable communication with competing providers' users, services like [[Skype]] and [[Facebook]] are effectively single-vendor communication protocols. Facebook is said to have achieved technological lock-in, in terms of its self-reinforcing presence on a society level.<ref name="facelock"/> However, if the lock-in is to Facebook specifically, not [[social media]] in general, then it is fair to promote this title to collective ''vendor'' lock-in.