Antitrust and Upstream Platform Power Plays
A Policy in Bed with Procrustes
a. k. von moltke
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© A.K. von Moltke 2023
The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2023
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Public sector information reproduced under Open Government Licence v3.0 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/open-government-licence.htm)
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2023942358
ISBN 978–0–19–287305–7
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192873057.001.0001
Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
Preface
Powerful digital platforms have riled up antitrust decision-makers around the world. Intriguingly, one issue has grabbed most of their attention while remaining surprisingly under-rationalized. Over the last few years, decision-makers have indeed mainly been catering to the anxieties of app developers, merchants, content providers, gig workers, and the likes, who all denounce abusive behaviour by the platforms they now depend on to reach us. So, instead of following the usual playbook of ‘looking down’ along the value chain at the plight of consumers, the recent policy trend has been to ‘look up’ at the ordeal of suppliers.
This book is a reaction to the state of affairs. It asks: are such upstream platform power plays really ‘competition problems’, ones for antitrust, at that? The question, admittedly, is somewhat provocative at first glance; decision-makers have already decided that there is an obvious answer, namely yes. Yet, why, then, is the wider antitrust community so deeply divided on the matter? Plus, why do suppliers in the brick-and-mortar economy remain bottom feeders on the antitrust policy agenda as they have been for decades?—think of farmers victimized by powerful processors and food manufacturers who are themselves squeezed by big grocers like Walmart and Tesco. Besides, wasn’t contemporary antitrust (supposed to be) all about consumer welfare? At the very least, longstanding consensus still has it that supplier welfare simply cannot be the policy’s lodestar. Today, though, when it comes to the platform economy, provider concerns are earmarked as the ultimate priority. It is this paradox that has motivated my research. Given how antitrust has been, is, and will continue to be widely touted as one (if not the) appropriate response to the woes of those who supply the Googles of the world, it seems to me that we need a policy introspection to make some sense of what our decisionmakers have been, and currently are, up to—precisely what this book offers.
The analysis provided here is altogether normative, theoretical, and practical. Normative because it engages in a supplier-mindful soul-searching exercise, which advances our understanding of antitrust’s foundations; theoretical as it shows how upstream concerns in the platform economy can be rationalized by appealing to economists, but also to business and management scientists, digital ethnographers, as well as political scientists and philosophers; practical since it takes a deep dive into the complex antitrust machinery whilst remaining attuned to other policy levers.
With this said, I hope to have piqued the reader’s interest enough to move on to the Introduction, which sketches in more detail the book’s ambition. The subject
matter is polarizing; my modest aim is to offer arguments that might nevertheless prove compelling to anyone with a particular interest for the topic.
To conclude, I would like to both acknowledge several individuals and institutions for their role in making this project possible and emphasize that the views expressed herein are my own and not those of the public institution I currently work for, namely, the Belgian telecommunications regulator (BIPT).
First, I owe thanks to the University of Oxford and the Clarendon Fund for the opportunity, means, and absolute intellectual liberty to conceive the doctorate underlying this book. While many edits were made to account for practical developments that have occurred since November 2020 and to reflect maturing thoughts and new reflections, the essence and structure of my doctoral thesis remain. The support I received from these two institutions was my sole source of external funding for this project (be it financial or in kind). In accordance with the ASCOLA Transparency and Disclosure Declaration, I have nothing else to disclose.
Next, I must recognize the invaluable support of several friends: Nathalie Ska, who always lent me an attentive ear and to whom I also owe the deepest of apologies; Vassilios Copetinas, for our myriad debates and for being the only person in my entourage who could understand certain hardships that have marked my life these past couple of years; Josef Weinzierl, who pushed me intellectually, worried over my well-being, and inspired me more than he could imagine.
Third, my heartfelt gratitude goes to Ariel Ezrachi. He encouraged me after my first stint at Oxford University in 2015–2016 to return and pursue a doctorate; supported me intellectually for the three years it took to complete it; brought me on as a trusted colleague to tutor students and do research by his side; mentored me and, ultimately, befriended me. His brilliance is matched by his kindness and I have been the tremendously fortunate recipient of both.
Finally, this book is above all dedicated to my parents. To my late father, a true erudite with the noblest of hearts, who I hope would have been proud; to my mother, the person I look up to most and to whom I am indebted for everything and more.
Amédée von Moltke
Brussels November 2022
III. INTERVENTION
I. SOUL- SEARCHING
II. LOOKING UP
4.
3.2
3.
4.2
3.2.1
6.
5.
III. INTERVENTION
3.
4.
3.1
Table of Cases
EUROPEAN UNION
Court of Justice Judgements (Numerical)
Case C-6/72 Continental Can ECLI:EU:C:1973:22 [1973] ECR 215
20n�13
Joined cases C-6 and 7/73 ICI and Commercial Solvents ECLI:EU:C:1974:18 [1974] ECR 223 220n 255
Joined cases C-40 to 48, 50, 54 to 56, 111, 113 and 114/73 Suiker Unie ECLI:EU:C:1975:174 [1975] ECR 1663 100n 195
Case C-22/78 Hugin ECLI:EU:C:1979:138 [1979] ECR 1869
Case C-294/83 Les Verts ECLI:EU:C:1986:166 [1986] ECR 1339
Case C-161/84 Pronuptia ECLI:EU:C:1986:41 [1984] ECR 353
214n�210
49n�27
100n�196
Case C-415/93 Bosman ECLI:EU:C:1995:463 [1995] ECR I-4921 206n 153
Case C-279/95 P Langnese-Iglo ECLI:EU:C:1998:447 [1998] ECR I-5609 220n 256
Case C-519/04 P Meca-Medina and Majcen ECLI:EU:C:2006:492 [2006] ECR I-6991
Joined cases C-501/06, C-513/06 P, C-515/06 P and C-519/06 P GlaxoSmithKline Services ECLI:EU:C:2009:610 [2009] ECR I-9291
206n�154
50n�33
Case C-8/08 T-Mobile ECLI:EU:C:2009:343 [2009] ECR I-4529 48n 24
Case C-280/08 P Deutsche Telekom ECLI:EU:C:2010:603, [2010] ECR I-955 128n 133
Case C-52/09 TeliaSonera ECLI:EU:C:2011:83 [2011] ECR I-527 49n 27
Case C-209/10 Post Danmark ECLI:EU:C:2012:172 [2012] electronic Report of Cases
119n�85
Case C-457/10 P AstraZeneca ECLI:EU:C:2012:770 [2012] electronic Report of Cases 198n 97
Case C-32/11 Allianz Hungaria ECLI:EU:C:2013:160 [2013] electronic Reports of Cases
Case C-67/13 P Cartes Bancaires ECLI:EU:C:2014:2204 [2014] electronic Reports of Cases
197n�89
82n�71, 191n�43
Case C-413/13 FNV Kunsten ECLI:EU:C:2014:2411 [2014] electronic Reports of Cases 54n 55
Case C-413/14 P Intel ECLI:EU:C:2017:632 [2017] not yet published 133n 166
Case C-179/16 Hoffmann-La Roche ECLI:EU:C:2018:25 [2018] electronic Reports of Cases
Case C-230/16 Coty Germany ECLI:EU:C:2017:941 [2017] electronic Reports of Cases
197n�89
153n�28
Case C-525/16 MEO ECLI:EU:C:2018:270 [2018] electronic Reports of Cases 196n 82
Case C-225/17 P Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines and others ECLI:EU:C:2019:82 [2019] electronic Reports of Cases
Case C-228/18 Budapest Bank ECLI:EU:C:2020:265 [2020] not yet published
231n�11
194n�60
Case C-307/18 Generics (UK) ECLI:EU:C:2020:52 [2020] electronic Reports of Cases 50n 34, 186n 8
Case C-450/19 Kilpailu- ja kuluttajavirasto ECLI:EU:C:2021:10 [2021] not yet published 20n 13
xviii Table of Cases
Case C-377/20 Servizio Elettrico Nazionale ECLI:EU:C:2022:379 [2022] not yet published 20n 13, 95n 159
Case C-252/21 Meta Platforms ECLI:EU:C:2023:537 [2023] not yet published
Advocate General Opinions (Numerical)
96n�165, 198n�93
Case C-7/97 Bronner ECLI:EU:C:1998:264 [1998] ECR I-7794, Opinion of AG Jacobs 199n 102
Case C-477/10 P Agrofert Holding ECLI:EU:C:2011:817 [2011] electronic Reports of Cases, Opinion of AG Cruz Villalón
231n�11
Case C-23/14 Post Danmark II ECLI:EU:C:2015:343 [2015] electronic Reports of Cases, Opinion of AG Kokott 228n 307
Case C-413/14 P Intel ECLI:EU:C:2016:788 [2016] not yet published, Opinion of AG Wahl 192n 50
Case C-525/16 MEO ECLI:EU:C:2017:1020 [2017] electronic Reports of Cases, Opinion of AG Wahl
196n�84
C-165/19 P Slovak Telekom ECLI:EU:C:2020:678 [2020] not yet published, Opinion of AG Øe 199n 101
Case C-372/19 SABAM ECLI:EU:C:2020:598 [2020] not yet published, Opinion of AG Pitruzzella
C-252/21 Meta Platforms ECLI:EU:C:2022:704 [2022] not yet published, Opinion of AG Rantos
General Court Judgements (Numerical)
Case T-24/90 Automec II ECLI:EU:T:1992:97 [1992] ECR II-2223
Joined cases T-191/98 and T-212/98 to T-214/98 Atlantic Container ECLI:EU:T:2003:245 [2003] ECR II-3275
62n�115
96n�165
221n�262
54n�55
Case T-168/01 GlaxoSmithKline Services ECLI:EU:T:2006:265, [2006] ECR II-2969 89–90n 116
Case T-184/01 R IMS Health ECLI:EU:T:2001:200 [2001] ECR II-2349 223n 276
Case T-43/02 Jungbunzlauer ECLI:EU:T:2006:270 [2006] ECR II-3435
Case T-336/07 Telefónica and Telefónica España ECLI:EU:T:2012:172, [2012] electronic Reports of Cases
49n�27
128n�133
Case T-612/17 Google and Alphabet (Google Shopping) ECLI:EU:T:2021:763 [2021] not yet published 117n 72, 118n 77, 119n 82, 128n 135, 192n 51, 196n 74, 196n 75, 196n 78, 196n 85, 200n 109, 221n 263, 224n 282
Case T-93/18 ISU ECLI:EU:T:2020:610 [2020] not yet published
Case T-604/18 Google and Alphabet (Google Android) ECLI:EU:T:2022:541 [2022] not yet published
European Commission Decisions (Chronological)
206n�154
212n�195, 214n�212
Agence et Messageries de la Presse (Case IV/31,609) EC Notice [1987] OJ C164/2�
Filtrona v Tabacalera (Case IV/32,426) EC Decision 26 April 1989 (unpublished)
Kesko/Tuko (Case IV/M�784) EC Decision 97/277/EC [1997] OJ L110/53
235n�37
221n�263
204n�142
Google Search (Shopping) (Case AT 39,740) EC Decision 27 June 2017 117n 71, 117n 73, 118n 78, 118n 81, 119nn 82–84, 119n�86, 128n�134, 133n�163, 194n�61, 196n�81, 224n�282
Google Android (Case AT�40,099) EC Decision 18 July 2018
214, 214n�212
Amazon Marketplace (Case AT�40,462) and Amazon Buy Box (Case AT�40,703) EC Decision 20 December 2022
225n�287
UNITED STATES
Supreme Court Judgements (Chronological)
International News Service v Associated Press 248 US 215 (1918) �
United States v American Linseed Oil Co 262 US 371 (1923)
172, 172n�147, 173nn�150–51, 234n�26
128n�133
Northern Pacific Railway Co v United States 356 US 1 (1958) 49n 27
Brown Shoe Co v United States 370 US 294 (1962) 128n 133
Ford Motor Co v United States 405 US 562 (1972) 128n 133
United States v Topco Associates Inc 405 US 596 (1972)
Continental Television Inc v GTE Sylvania Inc 433 US 36 (1977)
National Society of Professional Engineers v United States 435 US 679 (1978) � �
49n�27
89–90n�116
50n�33
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co vs FTC 440 US 69 (1979) 48n 24
Broadcast Music Inc v Columbia Broadcasting System Inc 441 US 1 (1979) 191n 43
Associated General Contractors of California Inc v California State Council of Carpenters 459 US 519 (1983) �
Bonito Boats Inc v Thunder Craft Boats Inc 489 US 141 (1989)
City of Columbia v Omni Outdoor Advert Inc 499 US 365, 388 (1991)
91n�126
173n�152
49n�27
Eastman Kodak Co v Image Technical Services Inc 504 US 451 (1992) 211n 188
Verizon Communications Inc v Law Offices of Curtis V Trinko LLP 540 US 398 (2004) 54n 55, 218n 241, 221n 261, 231n 13
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v Billing 551 US 264 (2007)
Ohio v American Express Co 138 SCt 2274 (2018)
National Collegiate Athletic Association v Alston 141 SCt 2141 (2021)
Circuit Court Judgements (Chronological)
United States v Aluminum Co of America 148 F2d 416 (2d Cir 1945)
Taylor v Local No 7, International Union of Journeymen Horseshoers of the United States and Canada 353 F2d 593 (4th Cir 1965)
231n�12
82n�71
206n�154
176n�162
54n�55
Telex Corp v International Business Machines Corp 510 F2d 894 (10th Cir 1975) 180n 184, 180n 186
Fleet Wholesale Supply Co v Remington Arms Co 846 F2d 1095 (7th Cir 1988)
218n�244, 219n�246
Schachar v American Academy of Ophthalmology Inc 870 F2d 397 (7th Cir 1989)
59n�96
Jefferson County School District No R-1 v Moody’s Investor’s Services Inc 175 F3d 848 (10th Cir 1999) 207n 163
United States v Microsoft Corp 253 F3d 34 (DC Cir 2001) 220n 255, 224n 280
Little Rock Cardiology Clinic PA v Baptist Health 591 F3d 591 (8th Cir 2009)
United States v Apple Inc 791 F3d 290 (2d Cir 2015)
hiQ Labs Inc v LinkedIn Corp 938 F3d 985 (9th Cir 2019)
214n�209
79n�59
154n�32
hiQ Labs Inc v LinkedIn Corp, Case No 17-16783 (9th Cir 2022) 154n 32
Epic Games Inc v Apple Inc No 21-16695 (9th Cir 2023) 215n 214, 252n 13
District Court Judgements (Chronological)
United States v Richfield Oil Corp 99 F Supp 280 (SDCal 1951)�
100n�196
United States v United Shoe Mach Corp 110 F Supp 295 (DMass 1953) 219n 249
ILC Peripherals Leasing Corp v International Business Machines Corp 458 FSupp 423 (NDCal 1978) 180n 184, 180n 186
Jefferson County School District No R-1 v Moody’s Investor’s Services Inc 988 FSupp 1341 (DColo 1997)
BookLocker�com Inc v Amazon�com Inc 650 FSupp 2d 89 (DMe 2009)
207n�163
94
Jeung v Yelp Inc No 15-CV-02228-RS, 2015 WL 4776424 (NDCal 2015) 162n 81
Cotter v Lyft Inc 60 FSupp 3d 1067 (NDCal 2015) 238n 50
hiQ Labs Inc v LinkedIn Corp 273 FSupp 3d 1099 (NDCal 2017) 154n 32
New York v Deutsche Telekom AG 439 FSupp 3d 179 (SDNY 2020) �
Epic Games Inc v Apple Inc 559 FSupp 3d 898 (NDCal 2021)
Administrative Decisions (Chronological)
185n�7, 219n�247
215, 252n�13
Intel Corp 150 FTC 473 (2010) 168
Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet 30 FCC Rcd 5601 (2015) �
Other (Chronological)
Brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellant and in Favor of Reversal, Chamber of Commerce and Rasier v City of Seattle et al, 2017 WL 5166667 (CA9)
Civil complaint by Dreamstime�com� in case Dreamstime�com v Google, No C 18-01910 WHA (NDCal 2019)
240n�62
239n�58
151n�15
Civil complaint by Taje Gill, Esterphanie St Juste and Benjamin Valdez in case Gill et al v Uber Technologies, Inc et al, No 3:22-cv-04379 (NDCal 2022) 97n 171
FRANCE
Court Judgements (Chronological)
Voyages sur Mesures and LMnext FR v Ryanair (Case No 2013031969)
Paris Commercial Court Judgement 20 March 2018
234n�29
Google v Amadeus (Case No 1903274) Paris Court of Appeal Judgement 4 April 2019 199n 106
Voyages sur Mesures and LMnext FR v Ryanair (Case No 18/07621)
Paris Court of Appeal Judgement 11 May 2022
ADLC Decisions (Chronological)
234n�29
Navx (Case 10/0011M) ADLC Decision 10-MC-01 30 June 2010 131, 199n 105, 220n 257
E-Kanopi (Case 10/0081F) ADLC Decision 13-D-07 28 February 2013
GDF Suez (Case 14/0038M) ADLC Decision 17-D-06 9 September 2014
Booking�com (Case 13/0045F) ADLC Decision 15-D-06 21 April 2015
199n�106
139n�206
110n�26
Gibmedia (Case 15/0020M) ADLC Decision 15-D-13 9 September 2015 199n 106
Amadeus (Case 18/0048 M) ADLC Decision 19-MC-01 31 January 2019 199n 106
Gibmedia (merits) (Case 15/0019 F) Decision 19-D-26 19 December 2019 199n 106, 214n�208
Syndicat des éditeurs de la presse magazine (Case 19/0075M) ADLC Decision 20-MC-01 19 April 2020
94, 95n�158, 160n�73, 198n�95
GERMANY
Court Judgements (Chronological)
Google-Snippets (Case 92 O 5/14 Kart) Berlin Regional Court Judgement 19 February 2016 ECLI:DE:LGBE:2016:0219�92O5�14KART�0A
64n�123, 160n�70
Facebook (Case VI-Kart 1/19 (V)) Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court Judgement 8 August 2019 ECLI:DE:OLGD:2019:0826�KART1�19V�00
197n�90
Table of Cases xxi
BKA Decisions (Chronological)
Google/VG Media (Case B6-126/14) BKA Decision 8 September 2015 �
Facebook (Case B6-22/16) BKA Decision 6 February 2019
� 151n�19, 204n�143, 221–22, 221n�261
95
Amazon (Case B2-88/18) BKA Decision 17 July 2019 226
Google (Case B7-61/21) BKA Decision 30 December 2021 226n 294
Meta (Case B6-27/21) BKA Decision 2 May 2022
Amazon (Case B2-55/21) BKA Decision 5 July 2022
NETHERLANDS (THE)
226n�294
226n�294
Court Judgement
Apple v ACM (Case ROT 21/4781 and ROT 21/4782) Rotterdam District Court Judgement 24 December 2021 ECLI:NL:RBROT:2021:12851 101n 202
Administrative Decision
Apple (Case ACM/19/035630) ACM Decision 24 August 2021
UNITED KINGDOM
101
Court Judgement
Streetmap EU Ltd v Google Inc & Ors [2016] EWHC 253 (Ch) 143n 226, 146n 232, 194n 61, 215n 219
Administrative Decision (Chronological)
Priceline Com/Kayak (Case ME/5882-12) OFT Decision 14 May 2013 110n 29
Google – Privacy Sandbox Proposals (Case 50972) CMA Decision 11 February 2022
OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Australia
Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd (1981) 55 ALJR 333
Austria
Amazon BWB Case summary 17 July 2019 <https://perma�cc/FVL2-VWKG> accessed 18 November 2022
Brazil
E-Commerce/Google (Case No 08012 010483/2011-94) CADE General Superintendence technical note No 15/2018
India
42n�101
173n�153
151n�16, 156n�46, 186n�8, 194n�65, 200n�112
Matrimony�com Limited vs Google LLC & Others and Consumer Unity & Trust Society (CUTS) vs Google LLC & Others (Joined cases 07 and 12/2012) CCI Decision of 8 February 2018
120, 120nn�89–92
Table of Legislation
EUROPEAN UNION
Primary Law (Alphabetical)
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU) [2016] OJ C202/389 193n 53
art 16 193n 53
art 17
art 48
Treaty on European Union (TEU) (consolidated version) [2016]
193n�53
193n�53
OJ C202/13 51n 42
art 3 51n 42
art 19
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (consolidated version) [2016]
147n�237
OJ C202/47 46n 11
Preamble 59n 94
art 39
art 40
art 41
236n�40
236n�40
236n�40
art 42 236n 40
art 101 185n 1
art 102 62n 115, 185n 1
art 263
art 265
Secondary Law (Chronological)
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the Legal Protection of Databases [1996]
231n�11
235n�36
OJ L77/20 163n 92
Recital 39 163n 92
Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 Establishing the European Electronic Communications Code [2018] OJ L321/36 240n 61
art 67
Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on
240n�61
Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Single Market and Amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC [2019] OJ L130/92
233n�17
Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on Promoting Fairness and Transparency for Business Users of Online Intermediation Services [2019] OJ L186/57 243n 84
art 8 243n 85
art 16
art 17
art 18
243n�86
243n�86
243n�86
Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on Contestable and Fair Markets in the Digital Sector and Amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act) [2022] OJ L265/1 242
art 5 242n 78
art 6�
art 7�
art 8�
242n�78
242n�78
242n�79
art 9 242n 80
art 10 242n 80
art 13 242n 80
art 14
art 15
Preparatory Instruments (Chronological)
242n�78
242n�78
EC, ‘Impact Assessment on the Modernisation of EU Copyright Rules Accompanying the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market and the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the
Council Laying Down Rules on the Exercise of Copyright and Related Rights Applicable to Certain Online Transmissions of Broadcasting Organisations and Retransmissions of Television and Radio Programmes’ SWD/ 2016/301 final 10n 74, 159–60n 67
EC, ‘Impact Assessment Accompanying the Proposal for a Regulation on Promoting Fairness and Transparency for Business Users of Online Intermediation Services’ SWD/ 2018/138 final 193n 58, 194n 67
EC, ‘Inception Impact Assessment—New Competition Tool (“NCT”)’ Ref� Ares(2020)2877634 <https://bityl�co/ FjtB>accessed 19 November 2022 7n 51
EC, ‘Impact Assessment Report Accompanying the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Contestable and Fair Markets in the Digital Sector (Digital Markets Act)’ SWD/2020/363 final 10n 73, 177n 170, 208n 171
RSB, ‘Opinion—Impact Assessment/ Fairness in Online Intermediated Trade’ Ref�Ares(2017)5899542 <https://perma cc/TA83-TMCB> accessed 18 November 2022 195n 68
RSB, ‘Opinion—Impact Assessment/ Fairness in Online Intermediated Trade’ SEC(2018)209 <https:// perma�cc/TA83-TMCB>acces sed 18 November 2022 195n 69
UNITED STATES
Legislative Sources (Alphabetical)
Constitution
Preamble
Freedom of Information Act
51n�42
51n�42
� 120n�88
Interstate Commerce Act 246
Newspaper Preservation Act 235n 37
Robinson-Patman AntiDiscrimination Act
Sherman Act
110–11
185n�1
s 1 185n 1
s 2 185n 1
Non-Legislative Sources
Executive Order 14036 (“Promoting Competition in the American Economy”) 104n 215
GERMANY
Act against Restraints of Competition (ARC) 211n 184
s 18(2a) �
s 18(3a)
s 30
IRELAND
211n�184
211n�184
235n�37
Competition (Amendment) Act 2017 238n 54
UNITED KINGDOM
Enterprise Act 2002
225n�289
s 131(2)(a) 225n 289
Abbreviations
ABA American Bar Association
ACCC Australian Competition and Consumer Commissionn
ACM Autoriteit Consument & Markt (NL competition authority)
AdC Autoridade de Concorrência (PT competition authority)
ADLC Autorité de la concurrence (FR competition authority)
AG Advocate General
AI artificial intelligence
ARCEP Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes (FR Regulatory Authority for Electronic Communications, Postal and Print media distribution)
AU Australia
B2B business-to-business
B2C business-to-consumer
BEUC Bureau Européens des Unions de Consommateurs (European Bureau of Consumer Unions)
BKA Bundeskartellamt (DE competition authority)
BMWi Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (DE Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy)
BMWK (formerly BMWi) Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Klimaschutz (DE Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action)
BRICS Centre Brazil, Russia, India, China & South Africa Competition Law and Policy Centre
BWB Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde (AT competition authority)
CADE Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (BR competition authority)
CCI Competition Commission of India
CFREU Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
CGE Conseil Général de l’Économie (FR General Council for the Economy)
CMA Competition and Markets Authority
CNNum Conseil National du Numérique (FR National Digital Council)
CP consumer protection
CPS core platform service
CRA credit rating agency
DCMSC Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee (UK)
DCT digital comparison tools
DE Germany
DMA Digital Markets Act
xxvi Abbreviations
DoJ Department of Justice (US)
DSM Digital Single Market
EC European Commission
ECJ European Court of Justice
ECN European Competition Network
EOp equality of opportunity
ESEC Economic, Social and Environmental Council (FR)
ESMA European Securities and Market Authority
FAANG Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, Google
FCC Federal Communications Commission (US)
FR France
FTC Federal Trade Commission (US)
GAFA(M) Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, (Microsoft)
GWB/ARC Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen / Act against Restraints of Competition
HoL House of Lords (UK)
HoR House of Representatives (US)
IA impact assessment
ICN International Competition Network
IGF Inspection Générale des Finances (FR Inspectorate-General for Finances)
IMF International Monetary Fund
IN India
IO industrial organization
IP intellectual property
JFTC Japan Fair Trade Commission
KFTC Korea Fair Trade Commission
MFN most-favoured nation
MMO massively multiplayer online
NCA national competition authority
NL Netherlands (the)
Ofcom Office of Communications
OFT Office of Fair Trading
OMS online mapping service
OS operating system
OTA online travel agent
P2B platform-to-business
PL Poland
PT Portugal
RPG role-playing game
RSB Regulatory Scrutiny Board
SBP superior bargaining power
SCOTUS Supreme Court of the United States
Study Group Study Group on Improvement of Trading Environment surrounding Digital Platforms (JP)
Abbreviations
TEU Treaty on the European Union
TFEU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
UC unfair competition
UK United Kingdom
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
US[A] United States [of America]
