The German FCO's decision against Facebook: a first step towards the creation of digital house rules?

Q4 Social Sciences Competition Law Journal Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI:10.4337/CLJ.2019.02.01
K. Fountoukakos, M. Nuys, J. Penz, P. Rowland
{"title":"The German FCO's decision against Facebook: a first step towards the creation of digital house rules?","authors":"K. Fountoukakos, M. Nuys, J. Penz, P. Rowland","doi":"10.4337/CLJ.2019.02.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The 2019 decision by the German Federal Cartel Office (‘FCO’) against Facebook for its alleged abuse of a dominant position through its data collection practices is a landmark case that has received close attention beyond the German borders. It is the first case in which a European competition authority has found that terms of use that breach relevant principles under the data privacy framework can constitute abusive conduct in the form of an exploitative abuse under the competition rules. The case raises questions as to the relationship between the two legal frameworks. The FCO found that Facebook‘s terms of use and data collection practices constituted exploitative business terms directly harming Facebook users and also had detrimental effects on competition by reinforcing Facebook's market power in the social network market and advertising market. The case raises interesting questions on market definition and dominance in digital markets as well as on causality between dominance and abuse. In the bigger picture the Facebook case fits into the continuous efforts by the FCO to apply competition law in the digital sector in a dynamic manner. This article examines the FCO's reasoning in the Facebook Decision and outlines some challenges that companies in the digital sector might face in the aftermath of the decision.","PeriodicalId":36415,"journal":{"name":"Competition Law Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/CLJ.2019.02.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The 2019 decision by the German Federal Cartel Office (‘FCO’) against Facebook for its alleged abuse of a dominant position through its data collection practices is a landmark case that has received close attention beyond the German borders. It is the first case in which a European competition authority has found that terms of use that breach relevant principles under the data privacy framework can constitute abusive conduct in the form of an exploitative abuse under the competition rules. The case raises questions as to the relationship between the two legal frameworks. The FCO found that Facebook‘s terms of use and data collection practices constituted exploitative business terms directly harming Facebook users and also had detrimental effects on competition by reinforcing Facebook's market power in the social network market and advertising market. The case raises interesting questions on market definition and dominance in digital markets as well as on causality between dominance and abuse. In the bigger picture the Facebook case fits into the continuous efforts by the FCO to apply competition law in the digital sector in a dynamic manner. This article examines the FCO's reasoning in the Facebook Decision and outlines some challenges that companies in the digital sector might face in the aftermath of the decision.
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
德国外交部反对Facebook的决定:朝着制定数字家庭规则迈出的第一步?
德国联邦卡特尔局(FCO) 2019年针对Facebook涉嫌通过数据收集行为滥用主导地位的决定是一个具有里程碑意义的案件,在德国境外受到了密切关注。这是欧洲竞争管理机构发现违反数据隐私框架下相关原则的使用条款可能构成竞争规则下剥削性滥用形式的滥用行为的第一个案例。该案件提出了两个法律框架之间关系的问题。FCO发现Facebook的使用条款和数据收集行为构成了剥削性的商业条款,直接伤害了Facebook的用户,并且通过加强Facebook在社交网络市场和广告市场的市场力量,对竞争产生了不利影响。这个案例提出了一些有趣的问题,包括市场定义和数字市场的主导地位,以及主导地位与滥用之间的因果关系。从更大的角度来看,Facebook案符合英国外交部以动态方式在数字领域应用竞争法的持续努力。本文探讨了FCO在Facebook决定中的推理,并概述了数字行业公司在该决定后可能面临的一些挑战。
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
Competition Law Journal
Competition Law Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
If the Competition and Markets Authority were an emoji: merger clearance lessons from Meta/Giphy Economists on trial: how to make expert duties, meetings, and hot tubs work The UK and EU competition rules for research and development agreements: falling out of lockstep The assessment and communication of the benefits of competition interventions by the Competition and Markets Authority The risks of a form-based approach to exclusionary abuses of dominance – an economic perspective
×
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