Abuse of Dominance in Technology-Enabled Markets: Established Standards Reconsidered?
Posted by Social Science Research Network
Abuse of Dominance in Technology-Enabled Markets: Established Standards Reconsidered? – Miguel Rato (Partner at Shearman & Sterling LLP) and Nicolas Petit (University of Liege)
ABSTRACT: This paper seeks to examine whether the legal standards underpinning the application of Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) need to be revisited in light of the alleged specificities of “technology-enabled” markets. To this end, the paper is divided in seven parts. Following this short introduction (A), the paper offers first a definition of the very notion of “technology-enabled” markets (B). Then, it questions whether competition agencies should depart from conventional enforcement techniques when reviewing conduct in fast-moving, technology-enabled markets, and follow new, expedited enforcement procedures as proposed recently by several high-ranking officials (C). After this, the paper turns to substantive issues. It begins by reviewing the intricacies of market definition and dominance in technology-enabled markets (D). It then offers some general thoughts on whether a new, general legal standard for a determination of unlawful abuse is needed in technology enabled markets (E). Finally, the paper considers six categories of abusive conduct in the high-tech sector and shows that, faced with a variety of applicable legal standards for each of them, competition agencies, courts and plaintiffs have – understandably – almost always invoked and applied the loosest possible test in support of their allegations or findings. We suggest, in turn, that under existing case-law stricter standards could and should be applied, and that this is particularly important in the context of technology-enabled markets for the simple reason that it is in these markets that the most common pitfalls and shortcomings of the EU law on abuse of a dominant position are magnified (F).
Featured News
Massachusetts AG Sues Insulin Makers and PBMs Over Alleged Price-Fixing Scheme
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Apple and Amazon Avoid Mass Lawsuit in UK Over Alleged Collusion
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Top Agent Network Drops Antitrust Suit Against National Association of Realtors
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Weil, Gotshal & Manges Strengthens Antitrust Practice with New Partner
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Russian Court Imposes Hefty Fine on Google for Non-Compliance with Content Removal Orders
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand