Protection Of The Consumer’s Fair Trading Right In Differential Pricing By Big Data Technology

This article intends to discuss legal regulation of differential pricing by big data technology from the angle of protection the consumer’s fair trading right,which will be demonstrated by many research methods,such as economic analysis,empirical analysis,theoretical analysis,normative analysis and so on.The first part,the relationship between the legal regulation of differential pricing by big data technology and the consumer’s fair trading right.the consumer’s fair trading right is the core of their legal rights,and other rights are the means to realize this right.The protection of the consumer’s fair trading right should not only be formal fairness,but also pay attention to substantive fairness.Formal fairness is based on the assumption that the transaction ability of the subject is equal,while the substantive fairness is based on the specific situation and carries out differential treatment.In the special trading scenario of e-commerce,the trading ability between consumers and marketer is not equal,which does not satisfy the hypothetical premise of formal fairness,so we should pay attention to the substantive fairness of transaction and correct this inequality.In the application of law,the concept of substantive fairness should be introduced to interpret the laws and regulations.Differential pricing by big data technology is in essence the behavior of the marketer to analyze the lowest psychological price of consumers for differential pricing in order to obtain the maximum profit.The substantive fairness should be reflected in the result and process of the transaction.The regulation of differential pricing by big data technology should also be analyzed from whether the differential pricing result and the differential pricing process have damaged the substantive fairness of the transaction.The second part,differential pricing by big data technology infringes the consumer’s fair trading right.First,differential pricing by big data technology results did not violate the substantive fairness of the transaction.The main reason is that the transaction fairness is not equal to the same transaction result,and the substantive fairness of the transaction result lies in the treatment and payment between the transaction subjects,which is equal to compensation and accords with the standard of the law of value.From the view of pricing form,the behavior of differential pricing belongs to the marketer’s independent pricing right.The price discrimination in economics is not the same as the price discrimination in law,and the differential pricing form accords with the general business practice;From the pricing content,as long as the pricing conforms to the requirements of the law of value,the marketer is notobligated to offer the same price to all consumers.Second,the differential pricing process violates the substantive fairness of the transaction,mainly from three aspects: the marketer has fault in contracting,and infringes the consumer’s right to know and choose.The obligation to inform of the marketer should be interpreted according to the concept of substantive fairness.Price information is the important transaction information that affects the conclusion of the contract,and the obligation to inform should in essence include the obligation to inform the consumer that the marketer implements differential pricing.Let consumers decide whether to conclude the contract on the basis of full understanding of price information.On the one hand,it is the contracting fault of concealing the important transaction information related to the conclusion of the contract,on the other hand,it infringes on the consumer’s right to know and the right to choose.According to the second part of the article,the third part of the article analyzes the civil legal consequences of differential pricing by big data technology.It is demonstrated that differential pricing by big data technology satisfies the constituent elements of contractual negligence and consumer fraud,and that consumers have the right to request the cancellation of the contract.consumers also has the right to choose to let the marketer bear the punitive liability in the Consumer Rights and interests Protection Act or the contractual negligence liability in the contract Law.The fourth part of the article summarizes the full article.