摘要
我国反垄断法将滥用市场支配地位制度窄化为“垄断高价”“限定交易”等滥用类型的专门规制,不仅造成规制范围的限缩,也容易导致规制标准的混淆。文本规范的限制和解释进路的乏力,与大数据市场滥用规制的必然需求形成冲突对立的紧张关系。传统规制框架须因应大数据领域的市场特性,从市场势力识别、滥用行为甄别和竞争损害效果分析三方面作出相应调适。具体而言,首先,要结合数据价值链的现实场域识别市场势力;其次,借助“单方排他性和剥削性滥用”的法律构造,甄别和归纳大数据领域滥用市场支配地位的行为类型;最后,对反映大数据竞争扭曲形式的“限制互操作性”“不当采集和使用数据”等行为建立相应的识别方法和竞争损害分析。
The provision of prohibiting abuse of dominant market position in China’santitrust law is limited to such types of behavior as “monopoly pricing” and “limited transaction”,which not only narrows the scope of regulation,but also blurs the criteria of regulation. A lot ofanti-competitive behaviors in the field of big data are not stipulated by the antitrust law,whichmay lead to a lack of supervision. Furthermore,the current regulatory methods do not focus onthe analysis of big data market behaviors,but use the deductive method from general toindividual,tending to assume the type of monopoly behaviors on the basis of law. The doublefailure of legal provisions and interpretation methods contrasts strongly with the regulatoryrequirements in the field of big data. To tackle this problem,the traditional regulatorymethodology needs to be adjusted in accordance with the characteristics of the big data marketfrom the three aspects:market power identification,abuse behavior screening,and competitiondamage effect analysis.First of all,we should take the data value chain as the basis,and fully consider the networkeffect,cross-border competition,dynamic competition and many other characteristics of the bigdata market,to evaluate the market power. Secondly,with the help of the infringementidentification of “exclusionary abuse” and “exploitative abuse”,we may quickly identify andsummarize the behavior types of market dominant position abuse in the field of big data. Lastly,we should establish specific identification methods and competitive damage analysis to regulatethose anti-competitive behaviors associated with big data such as “restricting interoperability” and“excessive collection and use of data”.As China’s anti-monopoly law is being comprehensively revised and improved,we shouldtake this opportunity to modify the existing provisions and improve the regulatory methodologyin view of the development of the digital economy. For one thing,the legislature shouldsummarize special factors according to the characteristics of big data industry in the legalprovisions defining relevant markets and evaluating market power. For another thing,Chinashould refer to the legislative model of the EU competition law and determine “exclusionaryabuse” and “exploitative abuse” as the basic types of the abuse of dominant market position,so asto expand the scope of application of antitrust laws. In addition,China should issue antitrust lawenforcement guidelines,summarize the types of abuses common in the field of big data,andformulate corresponding antitrust law enforcement methods and regulatory measures.
作者
詹馥静
Zhan Fujing(Koguan School of Law,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 030107,China)
出处
《上海财经大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第4期138-152,共15页
Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics
基金
2019年度国家社科基金一般项目“数字经济竞争法实施难点问题研究”(19BFX163)。
关键词
大数据
市场支配地位
排他性滥用
剥削性滥用
规制路径
big data
dominant market position
exclusionary abuse
exploitative abuse
regulatory methodology
