Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Self-Preferential Behaviour of Internet Platforms -Comparing European and Chinese Competition law

Peng, Junyu LU (2024) HARN63 20241
Department of Business Law
Abstract
This thesis discusses how self-preferential behaviour of Internet platforms is regulated in the EU and China under the competition law framework. The purpose of the study is to compare the strategies and practices of these two jurisdictions in terms of legislation and enforcement in order to answer the following research questions: what are the limits on self- preferential behaviour of Internet platforms under the competition laws of the EU and China? The study provides insights into the application of the respective laws and regulatory effects by analysing specific cases in the EU and China. Through regulations such as the DMA, the EU has adopted a forward-looking regulatory strategy aimed at preventing market abuse by large platforms.... (More)
This thesis discusses how self-preferential behaviour of Internet platforms is regulated in the EU and China under the competition law framework. The purpose of the study is to compare the strategies and practices of these two jurisdictions in terms of legislation and enforcement in order to answer the following research questions: what are the limits on self- preferential behaviour of Internet platforms under the competition laws of the EU and China? The study provides insights into the application of the respective laws and regulatory effects by analysing specific cases in the EU and China. Through regulations such as the DMA, the EU has adopted a forward-looking regulatory strategy aimed at preventing market abuse by large platforms. The Google Shopping case shows how the EU implements strict enforcement measures. In contrast, China's regulatory strategy focuses more on principle-based guidance and ex post correction, and strengthens the regulation of the platform economy through amendments to the Antitrust Law and case trials. Through comparative analysis, this study finds that although both are committed to preventing anticompetitive behaviours on Internet platforms, there are significant differences in regulatory approaches, legal transparency and preventive measures. The EU's approach is more systematic and prescriptive, while China shows greater flexibility and adaptability. These findings provide important perspectives and insights for understanding and improving regulatory strategies for digital markets on a global scale. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Peng, Junyu LU
supervisor
organization
course
HARN63 20241
year
type
H1 - Master's Degree (One Year)
subject
keywords
EU Competition Law, China Antitrust Law, Internet Platforms, Self- preferential Behaviour, DMA
language
English
id
9157035
date added to LUP
2024-06-03 09:29:43
date last changed
2024-06-03 09:29:43
@misc{9157035,
  abstract     = {{This thesis discusses how self-preferential behaviour of Internet platforms is regulated in the EU and China under the competition law framework. The purpose of the study is to compare the strategies and practices of these two jurisdictions in terms of legislation and enforcement in order to answer the following research questions: what are the limits on self- preferential behaviour of Internet platforms under the competition laws of the EU and China? The study provides insights into the application of the respective laws and regulatory effects by analysing specific cases in the EU and China. Through regulations such as the DMA, the EU has adopted a forward-looking regulatory strategy aimed at preventing market abuse by large platforms. The Google Shopping case shows how the EU implements strict enforcement measures. In contrast, China's regulatory strategy focuses more on principle-based guidance and ex post correction, and strengthens the regulation of the platform economy through amendments to the Antitrust Law and case trials. Through comparative analysis, this study finds that although both are committed to preventing anticompetitive behaviours on Internet platforms, there are significant differences in regulatory approaches, legal transparency and preventive measures. The EU's approach is more systematic and prescriptive, while China shows greater flexibility and adaptability. These findings provide important perspectives and insights for understanding and improving regulatory strategies for digital markets on a global scale.}},
  author       = {{Peng, Junyu}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Self-Preferential Behaviour of Internet Platforms -Comparing European and Chinese Competition law}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}