The Digital Markets Act’s Innovation Paradox: Towards a Digital Magna Carta and Leviathan?

LSE Law Review Pub Date : 2024-03-08 DOI:10.61315/lselr.652
Ishmael Liwanda
{"title":"The Digital Markets Act’s Innovation Paradox: Towards a Digital Magna Carta and Leviathan?","authors":"Ishmael Liwanda","doi":"10.61315/lselr.652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Digital Markets Act (DMA) represents the culmination of over a decade of debate and litigation on how to deal with the impact of the largest technology companies on the European economy. The DMA explicitly seeks to promote fairness and contestability. But it is also undeniable a key motivation behind the regulation was to promote competition and innovation in digital markets. This article aspired to partially address a simple, but complex question: Will the DMA promote innovation? It is argued that the DMA is concerned with the promotion of specific forms of competition innovation, with an emphasis on the structural redistribution of economic rents to achieve its aims. The article posits that the predominant forms of innovation competition promoted in the regulation both exemplify the DMA’s genius as well as its principal failing. By prioritising its pursuit of structural rent distribution, the DMA fails to acknowledge the idiosyncrasies of individual digital markets, instead favouring particular forms of innovation competition. As a result, the regulation is at risk of becoming a regulatory Leviathan: an overbearing set of rules whose objective is to impose or foster particular forms of competitive pressure in the digital sector, regardless of whether such competition is effective.","PeriodicalId":514338,"journal":{"name":"LSE Law Review","volume":"29 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSE Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.61315/lselr.652","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) represents the culmination of over a decade of debate and litigation on how to deal with the impact of the largest technology companies on the European economy. The DMA explicitly seeks to promote fairness and contestability. But it is also undeniable a key motivation behind the regulation was to promote competition and innovation in digital markets. This article aspired to partially address a simple, but complex question: Will the DMA promote innovation? It is argued that the DMA is concerned with the promotion of specific forms of competition innovation, with an emphasis on the structural redistribution of economic rents to achieve its aims. The article posits that the predominant forms of innovation competition promoted in the regulation both exemplify the DMA’s genius as well as its principal failing. By prioritising its pursuit of structural rent distribution, the DMA fails to acknowledge the idiosyncrasies of individual digital markets, instead favouring particular forms of innovation competition. As a result, the regulation is at risk of becoming a regulatory Leviathan: an overbearing set of rules whose objective is to impose or foster particular forms of competitive pressure in the digital sector, regardless of whether such competition is effective.
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
数字市场法》的创新悖论:走向数字大宪章和利维坦?
数字市场法案》(DMA)是十多年来关于如何应对最大科技公司对欧洲经济影响的辩论和诉讼的结晶。DMA 明确寻求促进公平性和可竞争性。但不可否认的是,该法规背后的一个重要动机是促进数字市场的竞争和创新。本文旨在部分探讨一个简单但复杂的问题:DMA 能否促进创新?文章认为,《数字千年发展目标》关注的是促进特定形式的竞争创新,强调通过经济租金的结构性再分配来实现其目标。文章认为,该法规所倡导的主要创新竞争形式既体现了《多哈市场协议》的天才之处,也是其主要缺陷所在。通过优先追求结构性租金分配,DMA 未能承认单个数字市场的特殊性,而是倾向于特定形式的创新竞争。因此,该法规有可能成为监管利维坦:一套霸道的规则,其目的是在数字领域施加或促进特定形式的竞争压力,而不管这种竞争是否有效。
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
The Licensee Called - He Wants His Peace Back! Fighting for IP Equity: A Zoom on the Forthcoming Who Pandemic Agreement Complicating the Comparative Taxonomy: the Impact on Corporate Governance of the Dynamic Interaction of Creditors and Shareholders Couzens and Carrick – Whole Life Orders for Police Officers after R v Couzens [2022] EWCA Crim 1063 How Can the Law Address the Effects of Algorithmic Bias in the Healthcare Context?
×
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