AI 등을 활용한 사업자간 담합과 경쟁법의 대응
Collusion Based on Artificial Intelligence(AI) and Competition Law’s Response
0
조회
0
다운로드
11
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the digital age, through machine learning, corporations have improved their ability to collect, restore, and analyze information on customers, competitors, and the market in general. Based on cumulative data, these corporations have highly sophisticated algorithms that can set prices of their goods and services. Due to the algorithms that can proceed data and conduct autonomous decision-making capability, it is crucial to collect data on consumers and competitors. Based on these algorithms, it is possible to monitor consumers and competitors, and to recognize changes of market situations in real time. On the one hand, algorithms bring positive effects in numerous cases. On the other hand, the prevalent use of algorithms can create a substantial risk in fair and efficient competition in the market. Recently, in this respect, the OECD and competition agencies of many jurisdictions have discussed the impact of algorithms’ automatic price setting on the competition in the market. Regarding the issue of algorithms’ automatic price-setting, an influential view is that the price-setting technology in itself does not constitute a violation of competition law. So far, a majority view seems to explain that consent among competing business entities is a required component for a violation of competition law. However, if computer algorithms become more developed and autonomous in the near future, a crucial question of competition law will lie concerning the meaning of consent among competing business entities. In this respect, it is a high time to consider whether core standards of the current competition law such as a business entity’s awareness should be maintained as the standards under the circumstances where technologies and machines are dominant in setting business strategies. Therefore, in carrying out competition policies, it is necessary for the judiciary and competition agencies in the government to consider and examine the interpretation of “consent” and “intent” in accordance with the current and future technology.
Abstract
In the digital age, through machine learning, corporations have improved their ability to collect, restore, and analyze information on customers, competitors, and the market in general. Based on cumulative data, these corporations have highly sophisticated algorithms that can set prices of their goods and services. Due to the algorithms that can proceed data and conduct autonomous decision-making capability, it is crucial to collect data on consumers and competitors. Based on these algorithms, it is possible to monitor consumers and competitors, and to recognize changes of market situations in real time. On the one hand, algorithms bring positive effects in numerous cases. On the other hand, the prevalent use of algorithms can create a substantial risk in fair and efficient competition in the market. Recently, in this respect, the OECD and competition agencies of many jurisdictions have discussed the impact of algorithms’ automatic price setting on the competition in the market. Regarding the issue of algorithms’ automatic price-setting, an influential view is that the price-setting technology in itself does not constitute a violation of competition law. So far, a majority view seems to explain that consent among competing business entities is a required component for a violation of competition law. However, if computer algorithms become more developed and autonomous in the near future, a crucial question of competition law will lie concerning the meaning of consent among competing business entities. In this respect, it is a high time to consider whether core standards of the current competition law such as a business entity’s awareness should be maintained as the standards under the circumstances where technologies and machines are dominant in setting business strategies. Therefore, in carrying out competition policies, it is necessary for the judiciary and competition agencies in the government to consider and examine the interpretation of “consent” and “intent” in accordance with the current and future technology.
참고문헌 (19)
- 김건우, "알고리즘으로 움직이는 경제 디지털 카르텔 가능성 커진다", LG 경제연구원, ~ (2017)
- 김경연, "AI 또는 가격 산정 알고리즘을 통한 담합행위에 대한 경쟁법적 규제에 관하여 - ‘버츄얼 경쟁’의 4가지 시나리오에서의 담합 성립 위험을 중심으로", 경쟁저널, (192) (2017), 한국공정경쟁연합회
- 김창수, "알고리즘 담합의 규제, 가능할까?", 테크M=한국인터넷진흥원(KISA) 공동기획, ~ (2017)
- 비즈니스 기회 창출을 위한 AI알고리즘의 활용, "이효정", 삼정 KPMG 경제연구원, ~, pp.ISSUE MONITOR 제84호 (2018)
- 2016 다보스포럼: 다가오는 4차 산업혁명에 대한 우리의 전략은?, "과학기술정책", 2016, ~
- 최난설헌, "알고리즘을 통한 가격정보의 교환과 경쟁법적 평가", 경쟁법연구, 35, pp.215~241 (2017), 한국경쟁법학회
- Stephanie Clifford, "Shopper Alert: Price May Drop for You Alone", NY TIMES, ~ (2012)
- Artificial Intelligence & Collusion: When Computers Inhibit Competition, "Ariel Ezrachi", ~, pp.Working Paper CCLP (L) 40
- Ariel Ezrachi, "Virtual Competition: The Promise and Perils of the Algorithm-Driven Economy" (2016), Harvard University Press
- Andreas Heinemann, "Can Computers Form Cartels? About the Need for European Institutions to Revise the Concertation Doctrine in the Information Age", Journal of European Competition Law & Practice (2016)
- The UBER-Cartel? UBER between Labour and Competition Law, "Julian Nowag", Lund Student Law Review, ~, pp.LundLawCompWP 1, 2016
- Byron Spice, "Carnegie Mellon artificial intelligence beats top poker pros", pp.2017
- Roundtable on information exchange between competitors under competition law, "OECD", ~, pp.DAF (2010), COMP[DOI]
- Roundtable Discussion on Price Discrimination, "OECD", ~, pp.DAF (2016), COMP[DOI]
- Algorithms and Collusion: Competition Policy in the Digital Age, "OECD", ~ (2017)
- Algorithms and collusion - background note by the secretariat, "OECD", ~, pp.DAF (2017), COMP(2017[DOI]
- Algorithms and Collusion - Note by the United States, "OECD", ~, pp.DAF (2017), COMP[DOI]
- When algorithms set prices: winners and losers, "Oxera", Oxera, ~ (2017)
- "Roundtable on Facilitating Practices in Oligopolies", Note of the United States, ~ (2007)
