Boundedly Rational Users and the Fable of Break-Ups: Why Breaking-Up Big Tech Companies Probably Will Not Promote Competition from Behavioural Economics Perspective

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW World Competition Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI:10.54648/woco2020019
Lior Frank
{"title":"Boundedly Rational Users and the Fable of Break-Ups: Why Breaking-Up Big Tech Companies Probably Will Not Promote Competition from Behavioural Economics Perspective","authors":"Lior Frank","doi":"10.54648/woco2020019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The disclosure regime introduced by the EU Damages Directive is largely unprecedented in many EU Member States. Its implementation raises a number of thorny questions for both legal scholarship and practice. This contribution proposes a comparative analysis of Germany’s implementation through the lens of US discovery as a means of exposing issues, testing weaknesses, and exploring potential solutions. While the US certainly does not get everything right, it has grappled with questions of disclosure for decades. This wealth of experience and case law provides a rich vein for European (civil law) legislators and practitioners alike to mine. To this end, we analyse the key uncertainties that persist in Germany’s implementation: from the conditions and costs of disclosure, to the protections against disclosure, and the consequences of a breach. Each step of the way the US model serves as a preface to the German approach, providing context for a critical comparative analysis. We conclude with practical recommendations for the future.\nantitrust, competition law, big tech companies, behavioural economics, bounded rationality, digital economy, brand name, platform and merger breakups, market power, remedies.","PeriodicalId":43861,"journal":{"name":"World Competition","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2020019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The disclosure regime introduced by the EU Damages Directive is largely unprecedented in many EU Member States. Its implementation raises a number of thorny questions for both legal scholarship and practice. This contribution proposes a comparative analysis of Germany’s implementation through the lens of US discovery as a means of exposing issues, testing weaknesses, and exploring potential solutions. While the US certainly does not get everything right, it has grappled with questions of disclosure for decades. This wealth of experience and case law provides a rich vein for European (civil law) legislators and practitioners alike to mine. To this end, we analyse the key uncertainties that persist in Germany’s implementation: from the conditions and costs of disclosure, to the protections against disclosure, and the consequences of a breach. Each step of the way the US model serves as a preface to the German approach, providing context for a critical comparative analysis. We conclude with practical recommendations for the future. antitrust, competition law, big tech companies, behavioural economics, bounded rationality, digital economy, brand name, platform and merger breakups, market power, remedies.
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
有限理性用户与拆分寓言:为什么拆分大型科技公司可能不会促进行为经济学视角下的竞争
欧盟损害赔偿指令引入的披露制度在许多欧盟成员国基本上是前所未有的。它的实施为法律学术和实践提出了许多棘手的问题。这篇文章建议通过美国的发现对德国的实施进行比较分析,作为暴露问题、测试弱点和探索潜在解决方案的一种手段。虽然美国肯定不是事事都做对了,但几十年来它一直在努力解决信息披露问题。这种丰富的经验和判例法为欧洲(大陆法系)立法者和从业者提供了丰富的矿脉。为此,我们分析了德国实施过程中存在的主要不确定性:从披露的条件和成本,到防止披露的保护措施,以及违规的后果。美国模式的每一步都是德国模式的序言,为批判性的比较分析提供了背景。最后,我们对未来提出切实可行的建议。反垄断、竞争法、大型科技公司、行为经济学、有限理性、数字经济、品牌、平台和并购拆分、市场力量、补救措施。
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
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
The Decriminalization of Cartel Activity in Kuwait: A Regulatory Framework Collective or Collusive Agreements? World Competition Book Review: Regulation 1/2003 and EU Antitrust Enforcement: A Systematic Guide Kris Dekeyser, Céline Gauer, Johannes Laitenberger, Nils Wahl, Wouter Wils & Luca Prete (Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer 2023) Big Data Requests: The Commission’s Powers to Collect Documents in Investigations Under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
×
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