Short Reads

ACM publishes position paper on market dominance by tech companies

ACM publishes position paper on market dominance by tech companies

ACM publishes position paper on market dominance by tech companies

01.03.2018 EU law

On 1 February 2018, the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) published a position paper setting out its strategy in relation to market dominance of internet and technology companies. The position paper confirms that the ACM will focus on digital markets and closely monitor developments in this area.

The ACM highlights the following three pillars of its strategy with regard to digital markets:

  1. Invest in knowledge on the functioning of digital markets. The ACM intends to invest in obtaining knowledge on the functioning of digital markets.

  2. Active monitoring of the market. The ACM will continue to closely monitor developments in the market so that it can act in a timely and accurate manner. At the same time, the ACM recognizes that technological innovation in digital markets is important for competitive dynamics, which it does not want to disrupt.

  3. Focus on international and national cooperation. Finally, the ACM will actively cooperate with international and national authorities in this sector. For example, the position paper referred to cooperation with the European Commission in the context of the Google shopping case and the cooperation within the European Competition Network regarding hotel booking sites [see our May 2017 Newsletter]. On a national level, the ACM plans to cooperate with the Dutch Data Protection Authority and the Dutch Media Authority (DMA). In December 2017, for instance, the ACM reported that it had launched a joint study with the DMA into the effects of digitalization on the media landscape.

This position paper reaffirms that digital markets are becoming a core focus of the ACM. So far, however, the ACM has not found any indication of anticompetitive conduct or dominant market power. See, for example, our September 2017 Newsletter on the study by the ACM into the market for online video streaming platforms. It remains to be seen whether there will be an increase in enforcement action in the future.

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of March 2018. Other articles in this newsletter:

  1. Court of Justice dismisses all appeals against cartel decision in the freight forwarding sector

  2. ACM publishes key priorities for 2018 and 2019

Team

Related news

11.01.2022 EU law
2022: the big reveal of 2021’s competition law promises

Short Reads - 2021 was riddled with sneak previews of a “review of competition policy tools with unprecedented scope and ambition”. These sneak previews, alongside 2021’s other competition law developments, seem to point in the direction of a more ‘social’ side to competition law in 2022, as well as looming Big Tech and Big Pharma battles, intensified (international) cooperation, more clarity on merger-related obligations for companies, and shiny new vertical and horizontal block exemption regulations. 2022 will reveal how and when the revised tools will materialise.

Read more

13.12.2021 BE law
Een onrechtmatig verkregen klantenlijst mag niet worden gebruikt om klanten van een concurrent af te werven

Articles - Het Hof van beroep te Gent(1) oordeelde dat het actief benaderen van klanten van een concurrent, door gebruik te maken van een onrechtmatig verkregen klantenlijst, onrechtmatige afwerving is en de bedrijfsgeheimen schendt. Het bevel tot staking van deze oneerlijke marktpraktijk strekt zich enkel uit tot de klanten die nog niet afgeworven zijn en moet beperkt zijn in de tijd.

Read more

13.12.2021 BE law
Publicité comparative des prix : prétendre faussement d’avoir le prix le plus bas est une pratique commerciale déloyale, mais être un concurrent et parler négativement de cette pratique à des tiers l'est aussi

Articles - Le Président du tribunal de commerce d'Anvers(1) a ordonné la cessation d'une publicité comparative illicite suggérant que l'entreprise offre un prix globalement plus avantageux, tant par rapport au marché dans son ensemble que par rapport à un concurrent spécifique. La critique par le concurrent de cette pratique publicitaire à l'égard d'un fournisseur commun est considérée comme du badinage et a également dû être abandonnée.

Read more