In a significant development for antitrust regulation, ByteDance, the owner of TikTok, has lost its legal challenge against being designated as a gatekeeper under the European Union’s (EU) Digital Markets Act (DMA). The ruling, delivered by the Luxembourg-based General Court on Wednesday, is a boost for EU regulators aiming to rein in the power of Big Tech.
The DMA imposes stringent requirements on companies classified as gatekeepers. These include making their messaging apps interoperable with competitors, allowing users to choose which apps to pre-install on their devices, and prohibiting the prioritization of their own services over those of rivals.
ByteDance contended that its designation as a gatekeeper could counteract the DMA’s objectives by protecting established companies from newer competitors like TikTok, which lacks an entrenched market position. However, the General Court dismissed this argument, siding with the European Commission, the EU’s executive branch. The court stated that ByteDance had not provided sufficient evidence to support its claims.
“The Commission was fully entitled to consider that ByteDance was a gatekeeper,” the judges affirmed. They further noted that ByteDance met the DMA’s quantitative criteria, including global market value, the number of TikTok users within the EU, and the duration over which these user numbers had been maintained.
The ruling reinforces the EU’s stance on regulating major digital platforms and ensuring fair competition. ByteDance has the option to appeal this decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union, the highest court in Europe.
This case marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing efforts by EU regulators to address the dominance of major tech firms and promote a more competitive digital market landscape. The decision underscores the rigorous enforcement of the DMA and sets a precedent for future cases involving other tech giants.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 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