Welcome to EssayHotline!

We take care of your tight deadline essay for you! Place your order today and enjoy convenience.

Are Google and Apple abusing their market dominance by self-preferencing their own applications over third party competitors on the platform?

Apples tax

Apples’ iOS is one of the 2 dominant operating systems on current smartphones. Apple has full control over its App Store and has Apple Music, which is a direct competitor to Spotify. Spotify filed a complaint to the EU commission, stating that Apple abuses its market on the App Store and thus making it unfair for Spotify. The most important issues are: 30% in app purchase tax for Spotify, Apples limitation of usable the features that Apples own competitor app can use and Apples ability to reject certain updates of Spotify or remove the application at a flinch.

The question is wherever these practices breach article 102 TFEU. In a way Apple has built the ecosystem and the platform. So why should Apple help its competitors? A counter argument could be that if you are not in the Apple IOS App Store it is nearly impossible to have coverage among the average iPhone users. The average iPhone user is bound to the closed nature of IOS, it is nearly impossible to have another Appstore installed on your iPhone without intermediate knowledge.

One of these should be the main research question:

*Is Apple hindering competition unlawfully on its own App Store platform – specifically to Spotify?

*Are Google and Apple abusing their market dominance by self-preferencing their own applications over third party competitors on the platform?

*In what degree should Apple and Google to be allowed to self-preference their own applications – to prevent the free rider problem?

Suggested research questions by tutor

* Is Apple abusing its market dominance with the in-app store purchase on the Appstore?

* Is the preferential treatment Apple giving to its own apps legal?

Thesis format:

-Introduction

– Chapter 1 market dominance and abuse of power under art. 102 TFEU

– Chapter 2 Abuse itself

– Chapter 3 Positive self-preferences

-Chapter 4 how to solve this issue?

-Conclusion

Literature

Art 102: Abuse of dominance

Case Law

  • Case C-280/08 P Deutsche Telekom v Commission

-Protect competition

-Promote consumer welfare

By preventing firms to abuse dominant market position

 

Opnions

-Critic on Art 102 TFEU by David J Gerber

  • Guidance on the Commission’s enforcement priorities in applying Article 82 TFEU to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings OJ [2009] C 45/7

-Aim to protect competitive process and consumer benefits that derives from it

  • Michelin v Commission

A dominant firm has a special responsibility (…) to impair undistorted competition.

  • Whish, R. and Bailey, D. (2015). Competition law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 212-213
  • Loewenthal ‘The Defence of “Objective Justification” in the Application of Article 82 EC’ (2005) 28 World Competition 455

* Might be justifiable

*Treaty derogations –>public health/public interest/safety considerations

*Must be proportional

Guidance, para [30] As a source?

4 cumulative conditions

  • Theories of Self-Preferencing and Duty to Deal – Two Sides of the Same Coin?

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2561355

  • Theories of Self-Preferencing Under Article 102 TFEU: A Reply to Bo Vesterdorf

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2592253

  • Spotify’s allegations – genuine anti-competitive concerns or a devious bite of the Apple?

https://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/spotifys-allegations-genuine-anti-competitive-concerns-or-a-devious-bite-of

News articles

https://www.acm.nl/en/publications/acm-launches-investigation-abuse-dominance-apple-its-app-store

© 2024 EssayHotline.com. All Rights Reserved. | Disclaimer: for assistance purposes only. These custom papers should be used with proper reference.