Study On Anti-monopoly Regulation Of Internet Enterprise Of Price Discrimination

With the fast development of the Internet, there has much dispute about the internetenterprises abuse their market dominant positions, such as The Microsoft Case and TheAmazon Case. In these cases, in order to get excess and monopoly profit, those internetenterprises take differential price between different consumers when they offer their productsor services, thus breaking the fair and liberal competitive order, hindering the technicalprogress, cutting the consumers welfare and so on. Because the special nature of the internetenterprises price discrimination, we suffer a trouble when we affirm them. In this regard,under the background of network economy, market shares are not the only norm to judge ifthe enterprise has a monopoly position any more, we also must to consider the market barrier,the essential facilities or the intellectual property of the technology. What is more, the internetenterprises can improve their economical environment and meet some people’s needs bytaking price discrimination steps, so we can not identify they are illegal directly. At last, in theanti-monopoly law in China, some regulations are not fit for the price discrimination ofnetwork economy. On the whole, in this field our traditional theories are facing adverseconditions, and this is my writing purpose.This paper is composed by introduction, epilogue and other three parts:Part one: the affirmation on the internet enterprises price discrimination. I talk this partthrough affirm the subjects and the objects. Firstly, the subject must have a market dominantposition, and then we introduce the method to define concerned market of the internetenterprises. Then combine the features of the internet enterprises, pointing out that marketshares are not the only norm to judge if the enterprise has a monopoly position any more, wealso must to consider the market barrier, the essential facilities or the intellectual property ofthe technology.Part tow: the illegality of the internet firms price discrimination. When we judge if therehave abuse conducts, we depend on rational principle and per se rules. By compare the twoprinciples, we find the rational principle is better to judge if there exists the illegality of theinternet enterprises price discrimination. Following this, I talk about the main factors whenjudging the illegality of the conduct, and analyze the subjective intent and consequenceconcretely. Section three: the legal liability of the internet firms price discrimination.Comprehensively analyze the civil liability, the criminal liability and the administrativeresponsibilities of the conducts of the internet enterprises price discrimination, indicatingmany liability forms, for example, three times the compensation system, impose a fine,forfeit, imprison etc. In this paper, I emphasize the necessity to establish the legal liability inorder to anti-monopoly, by which we can provide theoretical support to found complete andeffective anti-monopoly setup, so we could maintain competition order, promote technologyinnovation and protect consumers welfare.