摘要
平台经济领域的自我优待行为因其呈现出的新颖外观而备受关注,但目前学界并未能就对其采用何种分析方法形成相对一致的共识。通过分析谷歌比较购物案和亚马逊黄金购物车案中自我优待的行为方式发现,该行为只是在歧视方式上与传统的差别待遇行为存在不同,本质并未改变,因而反垄断法中关于差别待遇行为的理论与规则仍然适用。欧盟委员会对这两个案件的调整过程也印证:(1)在相关市场界定方面,传统的需求替代性标准并未受到挑战;(2)在支配地位认定方面,以市场份额为首要因素的传统方法仍然适用;(3)在竞争效果考察中,仍需要关注优待行为排斥下游竞争的效果;(4)在行为效率考察中,仍由当事人提出合理理由进行抗辩。
The self-preferencing in the field of platform economy has attracted attention due to its novel appearance.However,the academic community has not yet reached a consensus on the appropriate analysis for it.By analyzing the self-preferencing in the Google Shopping case and the Amazon Buy Box case,it is found that this behavior is different from traditional discrimination treatment only in terms of discriminatory methods,but its essence remains unchanged.Therefore,the theories and rules regarding discrimination treatment in the Anti-Monopoly Law can still be applicable.The European Commission's handling of these two cases further supports this notion,as it confirms that(1)when defining relevant markets,the traditional standard of demand substitutability has not been challenged;(2)in determining dominant position,the traditional approach of using market share as the primary factor is applicable;(3)the examination of competitive effects should take into account the impact of self-preferencing on excluding competition in downstream markets;and(4)the parties involved still need to provide reasonable justifications for their actions when assessing behavioral efficiency.
出处
《竞争政策研究》
CSSCI
2024年第2期31-41,共11页
Competition Policy Research
基金
国家社科基金重大课题“数字经济时代竞争政策定位与反垄断问题研究”(项目批准号:23&ZD077)的阶段性成果。
关键词
平台经济
自我优待
差别待遇
双边市场
Platform Economy
Self-preferencing
Discrimination Treatment
Two-sided Market
