Legal Regulations On Search Engine Providers Abusing Market Dominance

Since the emergence of search engine service providers represented by Baidu and Google,in just a few decades,search engine services have developed into an important part of the Internet economy and have been favored by the majority of Internet users.The main reason is to help people get through the gate of the network world has greatly shortened the time to receive information and brought convenience to work and life.However,when the search engine service industry is in full swing,monopoly disputes in the search engine field are intensifying.The abuse of market dominance by service providers not only infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of network users,but also seriously disrupts the entire search engine service industry.In view of the new features of the search engine service market,such as bilateral platforms,network externalities,and cross-price subsidies,which make it very different from the traditional unilateral economic market,the monopoly of the search engine service market in accordance with China's current "Anti-Monopoly Law" regulations are very inadequate,so it is urgent to improve the relevant laws and regulations in China.This article takes the typical case analysis of "Everyone v.Baidu Case" and "EU Anti-Google Antitrust Investigation Case" as the starting point.Focusing on the focus of the case on the abuse of market dominance,the search engine is defined in the relevant market and the market dominance is determined,Abuse,and other issues to discuss,analyze China's current legislation in the search engine service field abuse market domination behavior regulation,and put forward some reasonable suggestions.First,regarding the definition of the relevant market in the search engine field,due to the asymmetric pricing model of the search engine platform,the service business provided by the platform overlaps and the service boundary is blurred.The traditional demand replacement analysis method and the assumption of monopoly test method are used to There are many unreasonable points in the market definition,so it can be solved by countermeasures such as reasonably weakening the importance of relevant market definitions and breaking the limitations of price standards.Secondly,the traditional market domination identification method also has great difficulties in the application of search engines: market share is difficult to determine and newtechnology barriers restrict.To this end,by readjusting the market share determination method,combined with the locking effect and network effect The comprehensive analysis of factors such as the impact of market entry barriers and market entry makes the identification of the dominant position of the search engine service market more accurate.Finally,with regard to the identification of abuses by search engines that dominate enterprises,service providers in the search engine field block websites with "spam links",favor their own comparison shopping services,and exclusive restrictions,which are different from traditional abuses,Redefining the abuses that constitute antitrust laws.In response to these shortcomings,this article innovatively proposes the following perfect suggestions:(1)Improve the traditional hypothetical monopolist test method,determine the information acquisition efficiency as the key indicator of the search engine service market,and reduce users by small and sustainable obtain the efficiency of the required information to observe the user's response to this,so as to determine the scope of the relevant service market.(2)To further clarify the constituent elements of abusive behavior by service providers,it is also recommended to add a general clause to Article 17 of the Anti-Monopoly Law.Monopolies that are deemed to hinder or restrict competition in the search engine service market in accordance with this Law should also be subject to Regulation to increase operability in judicial practice.(3)Reasonable distribution of burden of proof should stipulate that both the plaintiff and the defendant must provide evidence for the search engine related market.At the same time,considering the bilaterality and complexity of the search engine service market,a third-party professional institution should be introduced in the definition of market dominance,Through the inversion of the burden of proof to divide the relevant market of its industry.In the determination of abuse,the subjective reasonableness of the defendant's behavior is handed over to the defendant for proof,so that both parties can carry out proof in their own relatively familiar fields,effectively reducing the plaintiff's burden of proof.