Font Size: a A A

Study On Legal Regulation Of Internet Enterprise Of Exclusive Dealing

Posted on:2015-05-09Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:C L TanFull Text:PDF
GTID:2296330467468054Subject:Economic law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
In recent years, with the rapid development of the Internet industry, the Internetenterprise exclusive trading cases appear, for example," Microsoft Corp monopoly case","Intel case","Qihoo360v. Tencent case ", which emerge one after another, and becomepending issues mostly, leading to anti-monopoly law’s role of eliminating competition,maintaining order of competition getting in trouble on how to regulate the Internet enterpriseexclusive dealing. First of all, by the influence of internet economic factors such as network’sexternalities, bilateral market, the traditional SSNIP method for defining relevant market fails.It should not only be analyzed from the perspective of traditional products and territory, butalso be needed to consider the time factor. Secondly, compared with traditional industry,internet enterprise has a higher degree of concentration, and more elusive behavior, so havinga high market share does not mean monopolistic advantage. That whether barriers to enter setor not, enterprise’s innovation ability and profit ability, and the dynamic characteristics ofInternet market are need to be though about. What’s more, since the Internet industry haspositive effect on technology innovation, and improving social efficiency, judging the Internetenterprise exclusive dealing illegal faces multi value targets such as technology innovation,public interest and economic efficiency. The two should be balanced. Finally, our antimonopoly law defines only the civil liability and the administrative responsibility withoutprovisions for criminal responsibility in the regulation of Internet enterprise exclusive tradingbehavior, making the discretionary power of the judicial organizations too broad in theinvestigation of Internet enterprise’s responsibility. The existing problems above-mentionedshow that China’s "anti-monopoly law" has many shortcomings in the system structure, whichare investigated in the passage.The anti monopoly law’s regulation to the Internet enterprise exclusive dealing cannot dowithout mature logical thinking: the definition of behavior about exclusive dealingâ†'theidentification of illegality about exclusive dealingâ†'the anti monopoly law’s liability ofexclusive dealing. First of all, an in-depth analysis on exclusive dealing from aspects ofsubjective and objective aspect is need. When it comes to define related market and dominantmarket position, we should consider not only traditional methods or standards, but alsocombine with the network economic factors. Secondly, using rational principles in analyzingInternet enterprise exclusive dealing behavior, and on this basis, considering its subjective intention and objective result, to make decision on whether the act constitutes a violation ofthe law or not. Finally, based on the decision of illegal implementation of exclusive dealing,we define its responsibility.In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the passage mainly consists of thefollowing three parts:Part I: the definition of behavior about Internet enterprise exclusive dealing. Consideringbehavior value judgments, causes and characteristics of network monopoly, and limitations ofChina’s current "anti-monopoly law" and so on, we do deep analysis of exclusive dealingbehavior of Internet companies from subjective and objective aspects. Firstly, to define theInternet enterprises, mainly analyzing its definition and basic characteristics. On the basis of it,in order to define related market from perspectives of products, geographical and time aspects.Then it comes to innovate and reform definition standards of dominant market position suchas market result standard, market behavior standard, and market structure standard bindingwith network economic factors such as network effect, market entry barriers and so on.Secondly, to value objective aspect of Internet enterprises’ exclusive trading behavior, mainlyfrom concept, behavior, behavior features.Part II: the illegal identification of Internet company exclusive transaction. In the fullintroduction of general principle about defining the Internet enterprise exclusive dealing, Onthe basis of it, considering reasonable principle itself brings advantage, and comprehensivelyanalyzing the positive and negative effects brought by the behavior, so as to determine thereasonable principle for judging the act constituting illegal behavior. Of course, in thedetermination that whether Internet enterprises implement illegal exclusive trading or not, weneed to consider the following factors: first, the subjective purpose of the exclusive dealing,namely strengthening the dominant position in the market and setting entry barriersmaliciously; secondly, it has substantial damage on competition, i.e., does serious damage tocompetition order, economic efficiency, technology innovation, and consumer welfare.Part III: The responsibilities in antitrust laws to the Internet enterprise exclusive dealing.A comprehensive analysis of civil responsibility, administrative responsibility, and criminalresponsibility in Internet enterprise exclusive dealing, brings cessation of infringement,damage compensation, ending illegal monopoly, administrative penalty, criminal fine andimprisonment and other specific forms of responsibility. From effective deterrent to illegalmonopolistic behavior, the protection of law, maintaining the order of competition and promoting technological innovation, to establish system of legal liability including civil,administrative, and criminal responsibility.
Keywords/Search Tags:Internet enterprises, exclusive dealing, network effect, consumerwelfare
PDF Full Text Request
Related items