IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/14700_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Competition and antitrust in Internet markets

In: Handbook on the Economics of the Internet

Author

Listed:
  • Justus Haucap
  • Torben Stühmeier

Abstract

The rapid rise, enduring growth and success of Internet markets and e-commerce platforms have spurred a lively and sometimes heated debate among academics and policy-makers: do Internet markets foster competition or are they prone to concentration, possibly to the point of monopolization? Competition economists and lawyers vigorously discuss the peculiarities of these markets and whether traditional rules and interpretations of competition law are sufficient to deal with potential new competition problems. The cases against search engine Google have received most public and academic attention, closely followed by the e-book case against Apple. In addition, numerous cases concerning vertical restraints in online sales have recently been brought before European courts. These vertical restraints include across-platform parity agreements (APPAs), which are a special form of a most-favored customer clause, general bans on online sales or bans on particular platforms, dual pricing systems, and selective and exclusive distribution systems. This chapter starts with a brief discussion of the peculiarities of online markets and then discusses recent antitrust cases related to the Internet.

Suggested Citation

  • Justus Haucap & Torben Stühmeier, 2016. "Competition and antitrust in Internet markets," Chapters,in: Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 9, pages 183-210 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:14700_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9780857939845.00017.xml
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Babur De los Santos & Matthijs R. Wildenbeest, 2017. "E-book pricing and vertical restraints," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 85-122, June.
    2. Kaiser, Ulrich & Wright, Julian, 2006. "Price structure in two-sided markets: Evidence from the magazine industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-28, January.
    3. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1993. "A Simple Theory of Advertising as a Good or Bad," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 941-964.
    4. Cédric Argenton & Jens Prüfer, 2012. "Search Engine Competition With Network Externalities," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 73-105.
    5. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    6. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    7. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2014. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 10.
    8. Patrick Bajari & Ali Hortaçsu, 2004. "Economic Insights from Internet Auctions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 457-486, June.
    9. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. " Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    10. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    11. Marc Rysman, 2009. "The Economics of Two-Sided Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 125-143, Summer.
    12. Jan Bouckaert & Frank Verboven, 2004. "Price Squeezes in a Regulatory Environment," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 321-351, August.
    13. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    14. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Haucap, Justus & Wey, Christian, 2015. "Raising rivals’ cost through buyer power," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 181-184.
    15. Schuett Florian, 2010. "Network Neutrality: A Survey of the Economic Literature," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-15, June.
    16. P. Crocioni & C. Veljanovski, 2003. "Price squeezes, foreclosure and competition law," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 4(1), pages 28-61, September.
    17. repec:reg:rpubli:65 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Pollock, Rufus, 2008. "Is Google the next Microsoft? Competition, Welfare and Regulation in Internet Search," MPRA Paper 8885, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Gaudin, Germain & Saavedra, Claudia, 2014. "Ex ante margin squeeze tests in the telecommunications industry: What is a reasonably efficient operator?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 157-172.
    20. Hahn Robert W. & Wallsten Scott, 2006. "The Economics of Net Neutrality," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 3(6), pages 1-7, June.
    21. Ambarish Chandra & Allan Collard-Wexler, 2009. "Mergers in Two-Sided Markets: An Application to the Canadian Newspaper Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 1045-1070, December.
    22. E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
    23. Stephen Martin & Jan Vandekerckhove, 2013. "Market Performance Implications of the Transfer Price Rule," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 466-487, October.
    24. Serge Clerckx & Laurent de Muyter, 2009. "Price Squeeze Abuse in the EU Telecommunications Sector: A Reasonably or Equally Efficient Test?," Antitrust Chronicle, Competition Policy International, vol. 4.
    25. Krämer, Jan & Wiewiorra, Lukas & Weinhardt, Christof, 2013. "Net neutrality: A progress report," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 794-813.
    26. Elena Argentesi & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2007. "Estimating market power in a two-sided market: The case of newspapers," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(7), pages 1247-1266.
    27. Jay Pil Choi & Byung‐Cheol Kim, 2010. "Net neutrality and investment incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 446-471, September.
    28. Haucap, Justus & Kehder, Christiane, 2013. "Suchmaschinen zwischen Wettbewerb und Monopol: Der Fall Google," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 44, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    29. repec:oup:jcomle:v:3:y:2007:i:2:p:243-279. is not listed on IDEAS
    30. David Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2007. "The Industrial Organization of Markets with Two-Sided Platforms," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 3.
    31. Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "A Primer on Foreclosure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier.
    32. Glenn Ellison & Sara Fisher Ellison, 2005. "Lessons About Markets from the Internet," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 139-158, Spring.
    33. Jeffrey Rohlfs, 1974. "A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 5(1), pages 16-37, Spring.
    34. Evans David S., 2008. "The Economics of the Online Advertising Industry," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 1-33, September.
    35. Hermalin, Benjamin E. & Katz, Michael L., 2007. "The economics of product-line restrictions with an application to the network neutrality debate," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 215-248, June.
    36. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    37. Justus Haucap & Ulrich Heimeshoff, 2014. "Google, Facebook, Amazon, eBay: Is the Internet driving competition or market monopolization?," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 49-61, February.
    38. Robin S. Lee & Tim Wu, 2009. "Subsidizing Creativity through Network Design: Zero-Pricing and Net Neutrality," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 61-76, Summer.
    39. Gaudin, Germain & White, Alexander, 2014. "On the antitrust economics of the electronic books industry," DICE Discussion Papers 147 [rev.], University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    40. Kaiser, Ulrich & Song, Minjae, 2009. "Do media consumers really dislike advertising? An empirical assessment of the role of advertising in print media markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 292-301, March.
    41. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2016. "Procompetitive dual pricing," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 537-557, June.
    42. Wright Julian, 2004. "One-sided Logic in Two-sided Markets," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-21, March.
    43. Bagwell, Kyle, 2007. "The Economic Analysis of Advertising," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gaenssle, Sophia & Budzinski, Oliver, 2019. "Stars in social media: New light through old windows?," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 123, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    2. repec:eee:telpol:v:42:y:2018:i:5:p:386-394 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster, 2017. "Salience and Online Sales: The Role of Brand Image Concerns," CESifo Working Paper Series 6787, CESifo Group Munich.
    4. Budzinski, Oliver, 2017. "Wettbewerbsregeln für das Digitale Zeitalter - Die Ökonomik personalisierter Daten, Verbraucherschutz und die 9. GWB-Novelle," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 108, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    5. Anna Goeddeke & Justus Haucap & Annika Herr & Christian Wey, 2018. "Flexibility in Wage Setting Under the Threat of Relocation," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 32(1), pages 1-22, March.
    6. Budzinski, Oliver & Grusevaja, Marina, 2017. "Die Medienökonomik personalisierter Daten und der Facebook-Fall," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 107, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    7. Bonnet, Céline & Schain, Jan Philip, 2017. "An empirical analysis of mergers: Efficiency gains and impact on consumer prices," DICE Discussion Papers 244, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    8. repec:eee:telpol:v:42:y:2018:i:2:p:154-171 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Haucap, Justus, 2018. "Big Data aus wettbewerbs- und ordnungspolitischer Perspektive," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 96, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Budzinski, Oliver & Kuchinke, Björn, 2018. "Modern industrial organization theory of media markets and competition policy implications," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 115, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    11. Bertschek, Irene & Briglauer, Wolfgang & Hüschelrath, Kai & Krämer, Jan & Frübing, Stefan & Kesler, Reinhold & Saam, Marianne, 2016. "Metastudie zum Fachdialog Ordnungsrahmen für die Digitale Wirtschaft: Im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi)," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 147040.
    12. Budzinski, Oliver & Stöhr, Annika, 2018. "Competition policy reform in Europe and Germany - Institutional change in the light of digitization," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 117, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    13. Budzinski, Oliver & Noskova, Victoriia & Zhang, Xijie, 2018. "The brave new world of digital personal assistants: Benefits and challenges from an economic perspective," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 118, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    14. Budzinski, Oliver, 2016. "Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Wettbewerbspolitik durch Marktplätze im Internet," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 103, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:14700_9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Darrel McCalla). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.