Legal Aspects of Defining Market’ Boundaries where Digital Platforms’ Owners Participate: Amex Case-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Legal Aspects of Defining Market’ Boundaries where Digital Platforms’ Owners Participate: Amex Case

Published:2021-08-20 Issue:2 Volume: Page:88-97
ISSN:2542-0259
Container-title:Russian competition law and economy
language:
Short-container-title:jour

Author:

Maslov A. O.¹

Affiliation:

1. Kutafin Moscow State Law University

Abstract

Year by year, digital platforms are becoming more popular in doing business. At the same time antitrust regulators around all the world face with challenges in analyzing the market boundaries where digital platforms’ owners participate.The article examines legal aspects of determining product and geographical boundariesof markets where digital platforms’ owners operate.The article deals with Amex case in which The US Supreme Court held that boundaries of the market where two-sided transactional digital platforms’ owners operate should be determined by the transaction. No doubt, this approach is debatable and the fact that the Court issued 5—4 decision proves that.The article also deals with approaches in competition law doctrine to defining the boundaries of product markets in which the owners of digital platforms are involved.

Publisher

The Centre for Education and Methodics of the FAS Russia

Reference13 articles.

1. Filistrucchi, Lapo and Geradin, Damien and van Damme, Eric E.C. and Affeldt, Pauline, Market Definition in TwoSided Markets: Theory and Practice (March 16, 2013). TILEC Discussion Paper No. 2013-009, Tilburg Law School Research Paper No. 09/2013, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2240850 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2240850

2. Wright J.D., Yun J.M. Burdens and Balancing in Multisided Markets: The First Principles Approach of Ohio v. American Express. Rev Ind Organ 54, 717–740 (2019). URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11151019-09677-7?shared-article-renderer

3. Katz M., & Sallet J. (2018). Multisided platforms and antitrust enforcement. Yale Law Journal, Vol. 127. No. 7 P. 2144-2145, 2154. URL: https://www.yalelawjournal.org/feature/multisided-platforms-and-antitrust-enforcement

4. Connor John M. and Gaynor, Martin and McFadden, Daniel L. and Noll, Roger G. and Perloff, Jeff M. and Stiglitz, Joseph E. and White, Lawrence J. and Winter, Ralph A., Brief for Amici Curiae John M. Connor, Martin Gaynor, Daniel Mcfadden, Roger Noll, Jeff M. Perloff, Joseph A. Stiglitz, Lawrence J. White, and Ralph A. Winter in Support of Petitioners; In the Supreme Court of the United States; States of Ohio, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont, Petitioners v. American Express Company, and American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc., Respondents. (July 6, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3287799 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3287799

5. Harrison, Jeffrey Lynch, Ohio v. American Express: Misunderstanding Two-Sided Platforms, the Charge Card ‘Market,’ and the Need for Procompetitive Justifications (August 13, 2018). 70 Mercer L. Rev. 437 (2020), University of Florida Levin College of Law Research Paper No. 20-23, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/ abstract=3230282 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3230282