Taming the Shrew: There's No Need for a New Market Power Definition for the Digital Economy

H. Schmidt
{"title":"Taming the Shrew: There's No Need for a New Market Power Definition for the Digital Economy","authors":"H. Schmidt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3048266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The digital economy is all around us in our every-day lives and we rely on digital products more and more. Approximately 2 billion people are connected to the internet worldwide – a figure that is said to increase to 3 billion in the near future. \nThe European Commission recognises that the digital economy ‘… is the single most important driver of innovation, competitiveness and growth, and it holds huge potential for European entrepreneurs and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’. \nThe importance placed on the digital economy has recently been emphasised by the attention granted to the Google Shopping case, in which the European Commission found Google to have abused its dominant position as a search engine by giving an illegal advantage to its own comparison shopping service. In doing so it denied other companies to compete on merits and innovate as well as denying European consumers a genuine choice of services. Interestingly, European businesses are lagging behind those from other regions in the world in their exploitation of the digital economy. The European Commission is therefore intent on providing support in various forms to its own companies and improve their competitiveness globally. One of the many ways to encourage growth is by ensuring that there is a strong competition policy in place that can boost competition and innovation. The challenge is whether the competition rules (i.e. Article 101 and 102TFEU and the Merger Regulation) are still fit for purpose when dealing with the digital economy? That is, are we able to continue to make use of the traditional competition law tools with respect to the digital economy? Especially, when the digital economy appears to present new and different market characteristics that test our traditional understanding of competition within a market. The digital economy has been branded as having a ‘competition-to-dominance trait’, meaning that the market characteristics lend themselves to ‘automatically’ creating market power for the company that fulfils certain conditions. Therefore at the heart of this paper is the question, should market power in relation to unilateral conduct be defined differently in the digital economy, under the notion that the digital economy is an untameable shrew within the current competition rules.","PeriodicalId":295410,"journal":{"name":"Stockholm University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stockholm University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3048266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The digital economy is all around us in our every-day lives and we rely on digital products more and more. Approximately 2 billion people are connected to the internet worldwide – a figure that is said to increase to 3 billion in the near future. The European Commission recognises that the digital economy ‘… is the single most important driver of innovation, competitiveness and growth, and it holds huge potential for European entrepreneurs and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’. The importance placed on the digital economy has recently been emphasised by the attention granted to the Google Shopping case, in which the European Commission found Google to have abused its dominant position as a search engine by giving an illegal advantage to its own comparison shopping service. In doing so it denied other companies to compete on merits and innovate as well as denying European consumers a genuine choice of services. Interestingly, European businesses are lagging behind those from other regions in the world in their exploitation of the digital economy. The European Commission is therefore intent on providing support in various forms to its own companies and improve their competitiveness globally. One of the many ways to encourage growth is by ensuring that there is a strong competition policy in place that can boost competition and innovation. The challenge is whether the competition rules (i.e. Article 101 and 102TFEU and the Merger Regulation) are still fit for purpose when dealing with the digital economy? That is, are we able to continue to make use of the traditional competition law tools with respect to the digital economy? Especially, when the digital economy appears to present new and different market characteristics that test our traditional understanding of competition within a market. The digital economy has been branded as having a ‘competition-to-dominance trait’, meaning that the market characteristics lend themselves to ‘automatically’ creating market power for the company that fulfils certain conditions. Therefore at the heart of this paper is the question, should market power in relation to unilateral conduct be defined differently in the digital economy, under the notion that the digital economy is an untameable shrew within the current competition rules.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
驯服泼妇:数字经济不需要新的市场力量定义
数字经济在我们的日常生活中无处不在,我们越来越依赖数字产品。全世界大约有20亿人连接到互联网,据说这个数字在不久的将来会增加到30亿。欧盟委员会认识到,数字经济“……是创新、竞争力和增长的唯一最重要的驱动力,它为欧洲企业家和中小企业(SMEs)提供了巨大的潜力”。最近对谷歌购物(Google Shopping)一案的关注,突显了数字经济的重要性。在该案中,欧盟委员会(European Commission)认定,谷歌滥用其作为搜索引擎的主导地位,为自己的比较购物服务提供了非法优势。在这样做的过程中,它剥夺了其他公司在价值和创新上的竞争,也剥夺了欧洲消费者对服务的真正选择。有趣的是,欧洲企业在利用数字经济方面落后于世界其他地区。因此,欧盟委员会决心以各种形式为本国企业提供支持,提高它们在全球的竞争力。鼓励增长的众多方法之一是确保制定强有力的竞争政策,以促进竞争和创新。挑战在于竞争规则(即第101条和第102条tfeu和合并条例)在处理数字经济时是否仍然适用?也就是说,我们是否能够继续利用传统的竞争法工具来应对数字经济?特别是,当数字经济呈现出新的和不同的市场特征时,这将考验我们对市场竞争的传统理解。数字经济被贴上了“竞争主导特征”的标签,这意味着市场特征会“自动”为满足某些条件的公司创造市场力量。因此,本文的核心问题是,在数字经济是当前竞争规则下不可驯服的泼妇的概念下,是否应该在数字经济中对与单边行为相关的市场力量进行不同的定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Online Platforms and Vertical Integration: The Return of Margin Squeeze? Legal Implications of Data Mining: Assessing the European Union's Data Protection Principles in Light of the United States Government's National Intelligence Data Mining Practices Big Data, Open Data, Privacy Regulations, Intellectual Property and Competition Law in an Internet of Things World Taming the Shrew: There's No Need for a New Market Power Definition for the Digital Economy Impartial or Uninvolved? The Anatomy of 20th Century Doctrine on the Law of Neutrality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1