This open access book offers a comparative and inter-disciplinary perspective on the unique competition law challenges presented by the converged digital markets. Following the digitalisation of even ...the most traditional bricks-and-mortar sectors of the economy, a well-functioning internal market can only be guaranteed by ensuring the competitiveness of the digital markets. What role do intellectual property law and competition law play in this digital world? How can a more economic analysis strengthen innovation policies to achieve a truly competitive digital single market? The book provides a rigorous discussion of the many reasons why the regulatory responses, not just in Europe but in other jurisdictions too, may fall short. It addresses an array of procedural, substantive and other issues that are generating intense debate across the antitrust community. This includes the scope and objectives of digital regulation, whether the application of ex-ante rules would result in fragmentation and inconsistencies, and whether such regulatory regimes are an appropriate tool for substantive assessment. The book explores whether the application of these rules would effectively tackle the competition enforcement challenges seen under the competition laws, whether they can be applied without undermining other rights such as privacy, and whether they are appropriate for this digital age as well as the new digital era ahead of us. Part 1 offers a detailed inter-disciplinary perspective on the most recent legislative solutions in the European Union, namely, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, and the Data Act. Part 2 offers competition and regulatory responses to these ever-emerging digital challenges by the UK, Latin American, Indian and Chinese regulators. The ebook editions of this book are available open access under a CC BY 4.0 licence on bloomsburycollections.com.
This paper aims to provide a critical analysis to the relations between economic efficiency and justice as the objectives of business competition law in Indonesia within the framework of legal ...philosophy. Philosophical aspects explores view on equal opportunities for every citizen in their business behavior, relation between the principles of justice and efficiency considering that in the Law 5 of 1999 there is no any word “justice” mentioned. Several related schools of legal philosophy will use to analyse the problems, such as, Utilitarianism in dissecting the phrase "public interest and welfare", John Stuart Mill's theory of lliberty in examining "equal opportunities for citizens", The article uses the legal research by emphasising the critical analysis on economic efficiency and justice principles in Indonesian competition law and compare FTC. Article 3 of Law Number 5 of 1999 aims to improve economic efficiency as one of the efforts to improve people's welfare. From a philosophical point of view, people's welfare law is closely related to the "greatest benefit for the greatest people" (Jeremy Bentham). However, if we look at the interests between business actors and consumers, thiscondition can still be seen that the interest in efficiency still prioritizes the interests of business actors. Fulfilment of consumer justice is only placed as an "object" rather than a subject whose rights must be protected due to violations of business competition.
This post examines whether competition law can remain effective in prospective AI development scenarios by looking at six variables for AI development: capability of AI systems, speed of development, ...key inputs, technical architectures, number of actors, and the nature and relationship of these actors. For each of these, we analyse how different scenarios could impact effective enforceability. In some of these scenarios, EU competition law would remain a strong lever of control; in others it could be significantly weakened. We argue that despite challenges to regulators' ability to detect and remedy breaches, in many future scenarios the effective enforceability of EU competition law remains strong.
Digitisation is changing not only our society but also markets, strategies and busi- ness models, which has increased competition in many markets. At the same time, large companies with a digital ...business model, such as Amazon, in particular, are experiencing a rapid rise, which has triggered a debate about fair competitive conditions. However, it is not only the company’s significant market power that is a cause for concern. The increasing vertical integration of platform operators such as Amazon, which makes them direct competitors of their own platform users, also raises competition law issues. Against this backdrop, it is the aim of this article to analyse Amazon’s business model in more detail from a competition law perspec tive. The analysis aims to identify which parts of the company’s business model and the resulting strategies may be seen as problematic under competition law.
To develop AI, computing power and access to data (aka bigness) are crucial. Now, Big Tech companies appear evading EU competition law. Companies like Google and Microsoft evade the EU Merger ...Regulation by entering partnerships with smaller AI labs that fall short of shifting ownership but nevertheless increase the monopolistic power of Big Tech. These quasi-mergers are particularly problematic in the context of generative AI, which relies even more than many other services on incredibly vast computing power. That is a dire state from an economic as well as a more fundamental and democratic perspective, as concentrating economic might in the hands of very few companies may cause problems down the road.
Tying is usually defined as the dominant company selling one product since the buyer must also purchase a different product or agree not to purchase the bonded product from other suppliers. This ...paper analyzes requirements imposed by the reported business actor on other parties deemed to have violated the tying and bundling under competition law in Indonesia, the U.S., and the European Union. Also, it discusses the application of the Rule of Reason by the competition commission in these three region. This study uses a comparative law approach. The results of the analysis show that a tying agreement is an agreement that requires the recipient of the supply to buy other products that are not necessarily needed. Usually, these agreements are entered into by two affiliated companies or at least cooperating partners, one of which occupies a dominant position to prevent competitors from entering the relevant market. Not all tying agreements have a negative impact. Therefore, an impact analysis is needed through a rule of reason approach, especially in digital-based industries.
Global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) are the largest, most complex and, in the event of their potential failure, most threatening banking institutions in the world. The Global Financial ...Crisis (GFC) was a turning point for G-SIBs, many of which contributed to the outbreak and severity of this downturn. The unfolding of the GFC also revealed flaws and omissions in the legal framework applying to financial entities. In the context of G-SIBs, it clearly demonstrated that the legal regimes, both in the USA and in the EU, grossly ignored the specific character of these institutions and their systemic importance, complexity, and individualism. As a result of this omission, these megabanks were long treated like any other smaller banking institutions. Since the GFC, legal systems have changed a lot on both sides of the Atlantic, and global and national lawmakers have adopted new rules applying specifically to G-SIBs to reduce their threat to financial stability. This book explores whether the G-SIB-specific regulatory frameworks are adequately tailored to their individualism in order to prevent them from exploiting overly general rules, as they did during the GFC. Analyzing the specific character and individualism of G-SIBs, in relation to their history, normal functioning, as well as their operations during the GFC, this book discusses transformation of banking systems and the challenges and opportunities G-SIBs face, such as Big Tech competitors, climate-related requirements, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Taking a multidisciplinary approach which combines financial aspects of operations of G- SIBs and legal analysis, the book describes G-SIB-oriented legal frameworks of the EU and the USA and assesses whether G-SIB individualism is adequately reflected, analyzing trends in supervisory action when it comes to discretion in the G-SIB context, all in order to contribute to the ongoing discussions about international banking law, its problems, and potential remedies to such persistent flaws.
