Dominant Position in Digital Markets
https://doi.org/10.47361/2542-0259-2021-1-25-30-36
Abstract
The article explores the state of dominant situation in digital markets from the point of view of Russian and foreign legislation.
The conclusion is justified that traditional antitrust measures of the dominant situation (including those related to collective dominance) cannot be applied to the digital market, since market shares and concentration ratios based on market shares will not be significant indicators in the market environment.
It is proposed to use new criteria for determining the dominant position of a subject in the digital market, for example, direct and indirect network effects, parallel use of a service from different suppliers, etc.
About the Author
V. A. Sednev
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Victor A. Sednev
Leninskie Gory, 1, Moscow, 119991
References
1. Ivanov A.Yu. Merger review in the digital age: episode one in discussions on the fifth competition law reform package // Zakon. 2018. No. 2. P. 106—109 (In Russ.)
2. Kartskhiya A. A digital technological (online) platforms: russian and foreign regulation experience // Civil Law. 2019. No. 3. P. 25—28 (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18572/2070-2140-2019-3-25-28
3. Bashlakov-Nikolaev I. V., Maksimov S. V. Collective domination: issues of demarcation from individual domination and cartel // Competition Law. 2019. No. 4. P. 31—36 (In Russ.)
4. Bashlakov-Nikolaev I. V., Maksimov S. V. Collective domination: issues of demarcation from individual domination and cartel // Competition Law. 2020. No. 1. P. 10—13 (In Russ.)
5. Robertson V. H. S. E. Antitrust Law and Digital Markets: A Guide to the European Competition Law Experience in the Digital Economy. URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstractjd=3631002 (Дата обращения: 15.11.2020).
6. Baye M. R. Market Definition and Unilateral Competitive Effects in Online Retail Markets // Journal of Competition Law & Economics, Volume 4. Issue 3. September 2008. P. 639—653, https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhn015
7. Parashchuk S. A. Entrepreneurial law of the Russian Federation: textbook for undergraduates / Ext. ed. E. P. Gubin, P. G. Lakhno. 3rd ed., redesign. and additional. M.: NORMA-INFRA-M, 2017. 992 p. (In Russ.)
8. Caillaud B., Jullien B. Chicken & Egg: Competition Among Intermediation Service Providers // RAND Journal of Economics. Vol. 34, No. 2. Summer 2003. P. 309—328. DOI: 10.2307/1593720
9. Eber N. Introduction a la microeconomie moderne: Une approche experimental. Louvain-la-Neuve, 2016. 400 p.
10. Harbour P., Koslov T. Section 2 in a Web 2 World: An Expanded Vision of Relevant Product Markets // Antitrust Law Journal. 2010. Vol. 76. P. 769—794.
11. Papadopoulos A. (2010). The National and International Dimensions of Competition Law and Policy. In The International Dimension of EU Competition Law and Policy (Antitrust and Competition Law. P. 7—51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511762147.002
12. Robertson V. H. S. E. Delineating Digital Markets under EU Competition Law: Challenging or Futile? Competition Law Review. Vol. 12. 2017. No. 2. P. 131—151.
13. Stucke, Maurice E. Should We Be Concerned About Data-opolies? (March 19, 2018). 2 Georgetown Law Technology Review 275 (2018), University of Tennessee Legal Studies Research Paper No. 349, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3144045 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3144045
14. Stuttard, Dafydd and M. Pinto. The Web Application Hacker's Handbook: Discovering and Exploiting Security Flaws. 2007.
Review
For citations:
Sednev V.A. Dominant Position in Digital Markets. Russian competition law and economy. 2021;(1):30-36. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.47361/2542-0259-2021-1-25-30-36
Views:
966
Email this article 