Tying by statutory dominant firms under differentiated (stricter) scrutiny? Insights from economic theory and competition practice

China-EU Law Journal - Tập 9 - Trang 97-109 - 2023
Qian Wu1,2, Niels Philipsen1,3
1METRO, Faculty of Law, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
2Center on the Rule of Law and Development, Institute of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Science, Beijing Normal University, Zhuhai, China
3RILE, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Tóm tắt

Statutory dominant firms, different from dominant firms that have gained their market power through competition on the merits, have derived their market position from choices made by the state. From an economic perspective, tying by this kind of firm typically generates significant anti-competitive effects that are likely to outweigh the possible pro-competitive effects. Both in China and the EU, such tying practices have frequently taken place. Nevertheless, the economic findings have not been fully reflected in competition provisions and competition practice in these two jurisdictions. This may lead to error costs and enforcement costs, which is detrimental to consumer welfare. It is thus important for competition authorities and courts to carefully consider the economic findings, while taking into account also the principles of proportionality and legal certainty. To enhance the effectiveness of competition law, this study proposes potential ways of applying a differentiated (stricter) scrutiny of tying by statutory dominant firms to reduce error costs and enforcement costs.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Ai H, Philipsen N (2023) A critical reflection on the ‘Public Interest Exemption’ in China’s merger control regime. J Antitrust Enforc (E-pub ahead of print) D’Amico A, Balasingham B (2022) Super-dominant and super-problematic? The degree of dominance in the google shopping judgement. Eur Compet J 18:1–17 Evans D et al (2003) The antitrust economics of tying: a farewell to per se illegality. Antitrust Bull 49(1–2):287–341 Gal M (2013) Abuse of dominance-exploitative abuses. In: Lianos I, Geradin D (eds) Handbook on European competition law. Edward Elgar, pp 385–422 Garcés E (2012) An introduction to tying, foreclosure, and exclusion by M.D. Whinston. Compet Policy Int 8(2):145–161 Giannaccari A, Van den Bergh R (2017) Unilateral conduct of dominant firms. In: Van den Bergh R et al (eds) Comparative competition law and economics. Edward Elgar, pp 300–381 何源 (He Y) (2023) 国企法律规制的理念转型与体系融贯 (The conceptual transformation and system integration of legal regulation of state-owned enterprises). 政治与法律 (Political Science and Law) v 334(3):130–146 焦海涛 (Jiao H) (2020) 我国反垄断法修订中比例原则的引入 (The introduction of the principle of proportionality in the revision of the anti-monopoly law of China). 华东政法大学学报 (ECUPL Journal) No. 2:29-49 Laffont J, Tirole J (2001) Competition in telecommunications. MIT Press Langer J (2007) Tying and bundling as a leveraging concern under EC competition law. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn 李剑 (Li J) (2022) 中国反垄断法的移植与本土化 (Transplantation and Localization of China anti-monopoly law). Law Press China 李剑 (Li J) (2006) 法律经济学的分析与搭售合理性的认知 (The law and economics analysis and the cognition about the rationality of bundling). 西南师范大学学报 (人文社会科学版) (J Southwest China Normal Univ (Humanities and Social Science Edition) No. (2):164-170 刘延喜 吴贝纯 (Liu Y and Wu B) (2021). 中国滥用市场支配地位-民事诉讼案例研究[2008-2020] (Abuse of dominance in China—a case study of civil lawsuits). 知产力 (IPLEAD) Feb 2021, https://www.zhichanli.com/p/1257801146. Accessed 9 Oct 2022 马栋 (Ma D) (2020). 反垄断搭售案件实证研究-行政执法及司法案件 [2008-2020] (An empirical study on tying cases under the public enforcement and the private enforcement of the AML). 知产力 (IPLEAD) Dec 2020, https://www.sohu.com/a/438939286_221481. Accessed 9 Oct 2022 OECD (2009), State owned enterprises and the principle of competitive neutrality Posner R (2001) Antitrust law. University of Chicago Press Ramos J (2020) Statutory dominance: the state at the origin of market power. In: Ramos J (ed) Firm dominance in EU competition law: the competitive process and the origins of market power. Kluwer Law International, pp 35–82 Sagi G (2014) A comprehensive economic and legal analysis of tying arrangements. Seattle Univ Law Rev 38(1):1–35 Van den Bergh R et al (2017) Market power, market definition and entry barriers. In: den Bergh V et al (eds) Comparative competition law and economics. Edward Elgar, pp 124–182 王晓晔 (Wang X) (2014) 论反垄断法在被监管行业的适用 (The application of anti-monopoly law in regulated industries) 中国物价 (Price: Theory Practice). In: 王晓晔论反垄断法 (Wang Xiaoye on the Antitrust Law), pp. 243–256 王岭等 (Wang L et al.) (2022) 自然垄断行业市场化改革与反垄断监管政策研究 (Market-oriented reform of natural monopoly industry and antimonopoly regulation policy research), 国家市场监督管理总局研究项目 (SAMR research project) Whinston M (1990) Tying, foreclosure and exclusion. Am Econ Rev 80(4):837–859 Wu Q, Philipsen N (2023) The law and economics of tying in digital platforms: comparing tencent and android. J Compet Law Econ 19(1):103–122 吴韬 郑东元 (Wu T and Zheng D) (2021). 经济分析如何融入法律过程 : 欧盟竞争法改革的得失及启示 (How economic analysis can be integrated into the legal process: Gains and losses of EU competition law reform and its enlightenment). 财经法学 (Law and Economy) 37(1):3–17 Zheng K, Snyder F (2023) China and EU’s wisdom in choosing competition soft law or hard law in the digital era: A perfect match? China-EU Law J, Forthcoming.