Can Competition Protect Privacy? An Analysis Based on the German Facebook Case

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW
Dzhuliia Lypalo
{"title":"Can Competition Protect Privacy? An Analysis Based on the German Facebook Case","authors":"Dzhuliia Lypalo","doi":"10.54648/woco2021011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The increasing collection of personal data by online platforms causes concerns among regulators and consumers. Due to privacy-related market failures in multi-sided markets, the question of possible remedies arises. This article aims to determine if a contribution of competition law is needed to enhance data protection rules. The first part will discuss the possible types of datarelated abuses of dominance in the context of the pioneering attempt of the German competition authority. The second part will analyse the drawbacks of the German Facebook case and possibilities to reconcile it with EU competition law. In addition, the article will analyse other ways to tackle privacy issues, including the proposal for a Digital Markets Act (DMA). It is suggested that an intervention of competition law in data protection matters is unnecessary. We argue that it may prevent the emergence of innovative products and services, ultimately harm consumer welfare and competition, as well as put an undue burden on dominant undertakings. It is submitted that a coherent regulation allowing for legal certainty could serve the objective of consumer welfare while preserving the interests of undertakings.\nArticle 102 TFEU, data protection law, personal data, privacy, GDPR, exploitative abuse, unfair trading conditions, German competition law, Digital Markets Act, exclusionary abuse, Facebook case","PeriodicalId":43861,"journal":{"name":"World Competition","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2021011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The increasing collection of personal data by online platforms causes concerns among regulators and consumers. Due to privacy-related market failures in multi-sided markets, the question of possible remedies arises. This article aims to determine if a contribution of competition law is needed to enhance data protection rules. The first part will discuss the possible types of datarelated abuses of dominance in the context of the pioneering attempt of the German competition authority. The second part will analyse the drawbacks of the German Facebook case and possibilities to reconcile it with EU competition law. In addition, the article will analyse other ways to tackle privacy issues, including the proposal for a Digital Markets Act (DMA). It is suggested that an intervention of competition law in data protection matters is unnecessary. We argue that it may prevent the emergence of innovative products and services, ultimately harm consumer welfare and competition, as well as put an undue burden on dominant undertakings. It is submitted that a coherent regulation allowing for legal certainty could serve the objective of consumer welfare while preserving the interests of undertakings. Article 102 TFEU, data protection law, personal data, privacy, GDPR, exploitative abuse, unfair trading conditions, German competition law, Digital Markets Act, exclusionary abuse, Facebook case
竞争能保护隐私吗?基于德国Facebook案例的分析
网络平台越来越多地收集个人数据引起了监管机构和消费者的担忧。由于多边市场中与隐私相关的市场失灵,出现了可能的补救措施问题。本文旨在确定是否需要竞争法的贡献来加强数据保护规则。第一部分将在德国竞争管理机构的开创性尝试的背景下讨论与数据相关的滥用支配地位的可能类型。第二部分将分析德国Facebook案的缺陷,以及将其与欧盟竞争法相协调的可能性。此外,本文还将分析解决隐私问题的其他方法,包括数字市场法案(DMA)的提案。有人建议,竞争法对数据保护事项的干预是不必要的。我们认为,它可能会阻止创新产品和服务的出现,最终损害消费者福利和竞争,并给占主导地位的企业带来不应有的负担。有人认为,一项允许法律确定性的连贯法规可以在维护企业利益的同时服务于消费者福利的目标。TFEU第102条、数据保护法、个人数据、隐私、GDPR、剥削性滥用、不公平交易条件、德国竞争法、数字市场法、排他性滥用、Facebook案
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信