Two-sided markets and the role of antitrust law – lessons from Google Shopping and American Express
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In this Feature, we will analyze the EU Google Shopping case to try to identify how the two-sided nature of Google’s business has affected the European Commission’s analysis. To do this, we will keep in mind lessons from the American Express case in the US and the controversy raised by the decisions of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the US Supreme Court, adopting a single-market and net-effect approach to that case. We hope the lessons we draw from both cases will help us reflect on the future of antitrust law enforcement in view of modern two-sided platforms
Downloads
Article Details
References
Broos, Sébastien and Marcos Ramos, Jorge, Google, Google Shopping and Amazon: The Importance of Competing Business Models and Two-Sided Intermediaries in Defining Relevant Markets. (November 27, 2015). The Antitrust Bulletin, Vol 62, Issue 2, (2017). https://ssrn.com/abstract=2696045 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2696045
European Commission, ‘Action brought on 11 September 2017 – Google and Alphabet v Commission’, Case T-612/17, Official Journal of the European Union (Oct. 30, 2017), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62017TN0612&from=EN
European Commission Decision, case AT.39740 (Google Search (Shopping)) (Feb. 25, 1991). http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/39740/39740_14996_3.pdf
European Commission Decision Summary No. 2018/C 9/08 (Case AT.39740 — Google Search (Shopping)), Official Journal of the European Union (Oct. 30, 2017), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018XC0112(01)&from=EN
European Commission Press Release, IP/17/1784 (Jun. 27, 2017). http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1784_en.htm
Katz, Michael L. and Sallet, Jonathan, Multisided Platforms and Antitrust Enforcement, 127 YALE L.J. (2018). https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/KatzSallet_ieayvf51.pdf
Luchetta, Giacomo, 2012. "Is the Google platform a two-sided market?", 23rd European Regional ITS Conference, Vienna 2012 60367, International Telecommunications Society (ITS). https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/60367/1/720236207.pdf
Manne, Geoffrey A. and Wright, Joshua D., Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google (March 24, 2010). Lewis & Clark Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010-19; George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 10-25; Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 34, No. 1, Winter 2011. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1577556 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1577556
Mattiuzzo, Marcela. Propaganda online e privacidade: o varejo de dados pessoais na perspectiva antitruste. Revista do IBRAC, v. 21, n. 26, p. 295-314, jul./dez. 2014. https://bdjur.stj.jus.br/jspui/handle/2011/85354
Motta, Massimo. Interview for the Competition Policy International (CPI Talks), May 15, 2018. https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/05/CPI-Talks....pdf
Ohio v. American Express Co., 138 S.Ct. 355 (2017).
Ohio v. Am. Express Co., 138 S. Ct. 2274, 2280 (2018)
Rochet, Jean-Charles, and Tirole, Jean. Two-Sided Markets: A Progress Report, 37 RAND J. ECON. (2006).
United States v. American Express Co., 838 F.3d 179 (2d Cir. 2016).
Weyl, E. Glen. A Price Theory of Multi- Sided Platforms, 100 AM. ECON. REV. (2010).
https://www.blog.google/topics/google-europe/european-commissiondecision-shopping-google-story/, accessed on May 20, 2018.
http://www.cpcstrategy.com/blog/2017/10/amazon-google-shoppingplas/, accessed on May 20, 2018.
https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/05/CPI-Talks....pdf, accessed on May 25, 2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/technology/google-antitrustinvestigations-spread-across-the-globe.html, accessed on May 20, 2018.
https://theconversation.com/googles-defence-for-breaking-eu-law-ourusers-wanted-us-to-do-it-80218, accessed on May 20, 2018.