BÜYÜK ÇEVRİMİÇİ PLATFORMLARA YAPISAL ÇÖZÜMLERİN ULUSAL DÜZEYDE EX-POST UYGULAMASI

Abstract

Büyük Platformların verilerinden ve ekonomik güçlerinden yararlanarak elde ettiği pazar gücü, teşebbüslerin bütün dijital sektöre yayılmasını sağlamaktadır. Büyük Platformların pazarda hâkim durumları kaynaklı davranışlarında, hâkim durumun çeşitli yollarla, özellikle kaldıraç etkisi yoluyla bir pazardaki gücün bir başka pazara aktarılması veya kendini tercih etme gibi dışlayıcı davranışlar yoluyla kötüye kullanılması mümkündür. Avrupa Birliği gibi uluslararası aktörler de dahil olmak üzere çoğu ülke, dijital rekabet bağlamında rekabet mevzuatının uygulanmasında sorunlar olduğu sonucuna varmış ve bu sorunun üstesinden kapsamlı ex-ante düzenlemelerle gelmeye çalışmaktadırlar. Bir başka deyişle dijital piyasaları regüle etmeye çalışmaktadırlar. Ancak dijital sosyal ve ticari hayat yeni yeni ortaya çıkmakta ve teknolojik gelişmelerle birlikte de hızla ilerlemekte ve değişmektedir. Hızla değişen ve gelişen bir alanı düzenlemek, elbette onun karakterine, işleyişine ve pek tabii yenilikçi yapısına zarar verebilir. Bu nedenle, rekabeti bozucu ve zararlı olabilecek, aceleci bir ex-ante düzenleme çabası yerine, bu tarz iddialı adımlar atmadan önce tüm alternatif yöntemlerin sonuna kadar değerlendirilmesi gerekmektedir. Bu durumda, iyi tanımlanmış ve düzgün uygulanan bir ex-post yöntem, dijital sektördeki rekabet sorunlarının çözümünde daha iyi bir alternatif haline gelebilmektedir. Sonuç olarak bu makale, dijital sektöre yönelik ulusal düzeyde son dönemde yapılan rekabet müdahalelerinin sektörde mevcut rekabet sorunlarına karşı oldukça doğru ve etkili göründüğünü ileri sürmektedir. Uzun vadede yenilik ve gelişmeyi engelleyebilecek bir ex-ante düzenleme yerine, ex-post bir düzenleme mevcut duruma uygun bir çözüm olabilir.

Keywords

• Rekabet
• Yapısal Çözümler
• Ex-post Düzenleme
• Dijital Sektör
• Çevrimiçi Platformlar
• Dijital Piyasalar Yasası

EX-POST APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL REMEDIES TO LARGE ONLINE PLATFORMS AT A NATIONAL LEVEL

Abstract

The enormous market power enables Online Platforms to leverage their data and economic power to spread into the digital sector. Abuse of dominant position through various means, mainly exclusionary conduct, such as leveraging or self-preferencing, can be seen in the conduct of Online Platforms. Most countries, including international authorities such as the EU Commission, concluded that there is a gap in the law in the context of digital competition and decided to fill this gap through extensive regulation. However, digital life has just blossomed and is proliferating with technological development. Regulating a fast-changing and developing area would harm its character and innovative nature. Therefore, instead of a rushed ambition to regulate the area, which could be disruptive and harmful to the competition, all alternative methods should be considered before taking ambitious steps. In that case, a well-defined ex-post method could become a better alternative to address the competition problems in the digital sector. Therefore, this paper argues that recent competition interventions in the digital sector seem to be quite relevant and effective against competition problems present in the sector. Instead of an ex-ante regulation, which may hinder innovation and development in the long term, an ex-post could be the relevant solution to the current situation.

Keywords

• Competition
• Structural Remedies
• Ex-post Regulation
• Digital Sector
• Online Platforms
• Digital Markets Act.

References

1. AHLBORN, C., EVANS, D. and PADILLA, AJ, ‘Competition Policy in the New Economy: Is European Competition Law up to the Challenge?’ (2001) 22 European Competition Law Review 5.
2. ARANZE, J., EU parliament subcommittee calls for Google break-up, (27 October 2017) Global Competition Review, Available at: https://globalcompetitionreview.com/article/eu-parliament-subcommittee-calls-google-break.
3. BAKER, J., Preserving a Political Bargain: The Political Economy of the non-interventionist challenge to monopolization enforcement (2010) 76 Antitrust Law Journal 3.
4. BORK, R., The Antitrust Paradox: A Policy at War with Itself (New York, 1978).
5. BOSTOEN, F. and VAN WAMEL, D., `Antitrust Remedies: From Caution to Creativity` (2023) 14 Journal of European Competition Law and Practice, No. 8.
6. COULTER, M., Apple files legal challenge to EU's Digital Markets Act Reuters (17 November 2023).
7. DAVIES, S. and LYONS, B., Mergers and Merger Remedies in the EU: Assessing the Consequences for Competition (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2007).
8. DUNNE, N., ‘The Role of Regulation in EU Competition Law Assessment’, in José Rivas (ed), World Competition Law and Economics Review, (Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2021, Volume 44 Issue 3).

9. EROĞLU, M, Turkish Competition Board (“TCB”) Has Launched an Investigation against Facebook for Its Recent Implementation Concerning Data Sharing Preferences, (YIMEL, BRILL: The Netherlands, 2022).
10. EVANS, D. and SCHMALENSEE, R., ‘Some Economic Aspects of Antitrust Analysis in Dynamically Competitive Industries’ in Adam B. Jaffe, Josh Lerner and Scott Stern (eds) Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2 (1st ed, MIT Press, 2002).
11. EZRACHI, A., ‘Under (and Over) Prescribing of Behavioural Remedies’ (2006) University of Oxford, Centre for Competition Law and Policy, Working Paper (L) 13/05.
12. FALCE, V. and FARAONE, NMF, ‘Digital Ecosystems in the Wake of a Legislative/Regulatory Turmoil: A First (Tentative) Antitrust Assessment of the Italian (and European) Experience in the AGCM Case Law’, in José Rivas (ed), World Competition Law and Economics Review, (Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2023, Volume 46 Issue 1).
13. GAL, M. and RUBINFELD, D., ‘The Hidden Costs of Free Goods: Implication for Antitrust Enforcement (2016) 80 Antitrust Law Journal 521.
14. KHAN, L., ‘Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox’ (2016) 126 Yale Law Journal 3.
15. KÖHLER, A., ‘Online Advertising and the Competition for Data: What Abuse are We Looking For?’, in José Rivas (ed), World Competition Law and Economics Review, (Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2021, Volume 44 Issue 2).
16. KÖKSAL, A., Big Data and Competition Law: Market Power Assessment in the Data-Driven Economy (Routledge, London, 2023).
17. LEE-MAKIYAMA, H. and GOPALAKRISHNAN B., `Economic Costs of Ex Ante Regulations` (2020) ECIPE Occasional Papers, No 7, October 2020 .
18. MAIER-RIGAUD, F., HELLSTROM, P. and FRIEDRICH BULST, FW, ‘Remedies in European Antitrust Law’ (2009) 76 Antitrust Law Journal 1, 43-63.
19. MAIER-RIGAUD, F., Behavioural versus Structural Remedies in EU Competition Law, in P. Lowe, M. Marquis, & G. Monti (eds.), European Competition Law Annual 2013, Effective and Legitimate Enforcement of Competition Law (Chapter 7, Hart Publishing, 2016).
20. MOTTA, M.; POLO, M. and VASCONCELOS, H., ‘Merger Remedies in the European Union: An Overview ’, in François Lévêque and Howard Shelanski (eds), Merger Remedies in American and European Union Competition Law (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2003).
21. PECMAN, J., DO, H. and MANGALY, P., `Canada Should Avoid Costly Ex Ante Regulation of Digital Markets` Competition Chronicle (8 May 2023).
22. PODSZUN, R., `From Competition Law to Platform Regulation – Regulatory Choices for the Digital Markets Act` (2022) 7 Economics No 1.
23. POSNER, R., The Chicago School of Antitrust Analysis (1979) 127 U. Pa. L. Rev. 925.
24. POSNER, R., ‘Antitrust in the New Economy (2000) University of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 106.
25. REINSCH, W. and SUOMINEN, K., `Are US Digital Platform Facing a Growing Wave of Ex Ante Competition Regulation` Center for Strategic & International Studies (21 June 2023).
26. SHIKHAR, Singla, ‘Regulatory Costs and Market Power’ (2023) LawFin Working Paper No. 47.
27. TAJANA, A., ‘If I Had a Hammer… Structural Remedies and Abuse of Dominant Position’ (2006) 7 Competition and Regulation in Network Industries 1, 3-29.
28. TÓTH, A., ‘Creating More Public Value in the EU Competition Law by Reaching a Higher Level of Prevention in the Particular Context of the Digital Markets’, in José Rivas (ed), World Competition Law and Economics Review, (Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2021, Volume 44 Issue 4).
29. VAN DE WAERDT, P., “Everything the Data Touches Is Our Kingdom’: Market Power of ‘Data Ecosystems”, in José Rivas (ed), World Competition Law and Economics Review, (Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2023, Volume 46 Issue 1).
30. WHICH, R. and BAILEY, D., Competition Law (8th ed, Oxford University Press, 2015).
31. Autorita Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (Italian Competition Authority), Press Release (9 December 2021), Available at: https://en.agcm.it/en/media/press-releases/2021/12/A528.
32. Directorate General for Internal Policies, European Parliament, ‘Challenges for Competition Policy in a Digitalised Economy’ (2015) A study for the ECON Committee, IP/A/ECON/2014-12 PE 542.235.
33. ECN Recommendation on the Power to Impose Structural Remedies (9 December 2013) Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/ecn/structural_remedies_09122013_en.pdf.
34. European Commission, Questions and Answers: Digital Markets Act: Ensuring Fair and Open Digital Markets (15 December 2020) Brussels.
35. European Commission, Press Release, Antitrust: Commission fines Qualcomm 997 million EUR for abuse of dominant market position (24 January 2018) Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_18_421.
36. European Parliament, Digital Issues in Focus: Digital Markets Act Application Timeline (November 2022) Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2022/739226/EPRS-AaG-739226-DMA-Application-timeline-FINAL.pdf.
37. Furman Report, ‘Unlocking digital competition: Report of the Digital Competition Expert Panel’ HM Treasury (2019).
38. International Monetary Fund, ‘Rising Corporate Market Power: Emerging Policy Issues’ (2021) Staff Discussion Notes Volume 2021, Issue 001.
39. Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets: Majority Staff Report and Recommendations (Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, October 2020).
40. OECD, Case Studies on the Regulatory Challenges Raised by Innovation and the Regulatory Responses (14 December 2021), Available at: https://www.oecd.org/publications/case-studies-on-the-regulatory-challenges-raised-by-innovation-and-the-regulatory-responses-8fa190b5-en.htm.
41. The Federal Trade Commission, Press Release, FTC Alleges Facebook Resorted to Illegal Buy-or-Bury Scheme to Crush Competition After String of Failed Attempts to Innovate (19 August 2021) Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/08/ftc-alleges-facebook-resorted-illegal-buy-or-bury-scheme-crush-competition-after-string-failed.
42. UNCTAD, International cooperation in competition law enforcement – challenges for developing countries and best practices (2021) UNCTAD RESEARCH PAPER SERIES No.59, Available at:https://unctad.org/publication/international-cooperation-competition-law-enforcement-challenges-developing-countries.