Internet Industry Antitrust "Relevant Market" Definition

As an important feature of the information age,the Internet has connected the world or the world as a whole.All aspects of the working life of governments,enterprises,and individuals enjoy the convenience and speed brought by the Internet.The power of integration brought about by this convenience and speed has made individuals very small in front of a huge amount of data on the Internet.In this industry,the giants hold a huge amount of data,and the data is the gold mine and the most powerful weapon in the information era.If it cannot use the anti-monopoly approach to hang up the sword of Damex,then once it has a dominant market position The harm of the anti-competitive behavior of the enterprise enterprises will be difficult to estimate.This article is to recognize this kind of harm,starting with the recent practice cases of the Apple e-book case,Qihoo v.Tencent case.An analysis of the judgments and allegations made by the U.S.Department of Justice and the court on the definition of the relevant Chinese market for Apple's e-book case,and the description of the QQ software-related market by the judgments of the Guangdong Provincial High People's Court and the Supreme People's Court in the Qihoo v.Tencent case.Controversy in academic circles.Based on a full understanding of the new features of the Internet industry: platform competition,free models,bilateral markets,and lock-in effects,it is necessary to rethink the difficulties in the definition of relevant markets in the traditional anti-monopoly industries.The traditional definition method is mainly based on price competition.The method of defining the relevant market is no longer suitable in the current Internet industry.The free model widely adopted by the Internet industry makes the definition method nowhere.The characteristics of the bilateral market also make it difficult for the judiciary to take into account the impact of the target commodity in both markets in practice.Based on this,the author put forward his own ideas and methods in the distribution of laws and regulations,trial organizations,and burden of proof to provide some methods and directions for the relevant market definition of such cases.