디지털 경제에서 알고리즘 담합에 관한 연구
Study on Algorithmic Collusion in the Digital Economy
0
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
디지털 경제의 발전은 알고리즘 담합과 같은 경쟁법적 문제를 발생시킨다. 알고리즘의 활용은 시장의 투명성과 효율성의 증대시키지만 담합을 좀 더 용이하게 하기도 한다. 알고리즘 담합은 인간의 반경쟁적 공모 없이 알고리즘을 통한 자동적 정보교환과 모니터링 및 조정을 통해 담합 공모의 가능성을 높이고 경쟁자의 시장 참여 기회를 박탈한다는 특징을 가진다. 알고리즘의 담합의 규제는 인간의 행위가 개입이 된 경우와 인간의 행위가 개입이 되지 않는 경우로 구분해서 접근해야 한다. 미국의 David Topkins Poster 사건, Uber 사건, 영국의 Trod Ltd poster 사건, EU의 Eturas 사건, 유럽 Commission의 Asus 등의 재판매가격유지행위 조사 건은 모두 인간의 행위가 개입이 된 사건이며 기존 경쟁법적 원리에 따라 규제되었다. 그러나 인간의 행위가 개입이 되지 않는 알고리즘 담합의 규제는 기술 발전의 가정 하에서 향후 접근법을 고민을 해야 한다. 인간의 행위가 개입되지 않는 알고리즘 담합은 알고리즘에 대한 사전 예방조치를 하는 것이 현실적인 대안이 된다. 하지만 알고리즘이 인간의 예상을 넘는 담합을 할 경우 의식적 병행행위나 외관상 동조적 행위로 접근해야 한다. 의식적 병행행위와 외관상 동조적 행위는 불법적인 것이 아니므로 추가요소가 있을 때 규제가 있어야하고 이 때 사업자는 법적인 책임을 부담해야 한다. 추가요소는 최소한 알고리즘이 담합을 유도한다는 사업자의 의식과 적극적으로 담합을 거부하지 않고 수용하려는 사업자의 의도 또는 알고리즘 개발자의 적극적인 예방조치의 미실현 등이 될 것이다.
Abstract
The development of the digital economy brings the issue of algorithmic collusion from a competition law perspective. A use of algorithms increases the transparency and the efficiency in the market but it makes collusion easier. Specifically, algorithms enhances the possibility of the collusion through the automated exchange of information, monitoring and adjustment and it makes it difficult for potential competitors to enter the marketplace. We suggest two scenarios for the antitrust law’s application to the algorithmic collusion. Firstly, the scenario is the algorithmic collusion which human is involved. Secondly, the scenario is the algorithmic collusion which human is not involved. Topkins case, Uber case, and Trod case, Eturas case, and the recent European Commission’s investigation on the resale price maintenance are all involved in human’s collusion and these cases had been reviewed by the traditional competition laws. However, a new approach on the algorithmic collusion which human is not involved is required under the assumption of the development of technology. The prior measures to protect the competition will be the practical alternative to such algorithmic collusion. Also, in case the scope of algorithmic collusion may be beyond our expectations and human is not involved in such algorithmic collusion we need to consider the conscious parallelism and quasi-concerted practices. The conscious parallelism and quasi-concerted practices themselves are not illegal and they should be reviewed with the plus factors and still the antitrust liability should be attributed to the undertakings. Such plus factors may be the undertaking’s awareness that the algorithms will facilitate collusion and undertaking’s intention that it will accept the collusion without rejection and such plus factors will include the fact that the programmers did not take any prior preventive measures.
참고문헌 (64)
- 권오승, "경제법" (2015), 법문사
- 신현윤, "경제법" (2017), 법문사
- 이기수, "경제법" (2012), 세창출판사
- 이호영, "독점규제법" (2015), 홍문사
- 정재훈, "공정거래법 소송실무" (2017), 육법사
- 전지은, "온라인 판매자들의 가격조정에 관한 연구", 한국전자거래학회지, 19(3), pp.143~158 (2014), 한국전자거래학회[DOI]
- 최난설헌, "알고리즘을 통한 가격정보의 교환과 경쟁법적 평가", 경쟁법연구, 35, pp.215~241 (2017), 한국경쟁법학회
- 홍명수, "정보 교환과 카르텔 규제", 법과사회, (36), pp.277~299 (2009), 법과사회이론학회
- 디지털 경제, 과소평가되고 있다, "김건우", LG Business Insight, ~ (2016)
- 알고리즘으로 움직이는 경제 디지털 카르텔 가능성 커진다, "김건우", LG경제연구원, ~ (2017)
- 비즈니스 기회 창출을 위한 AI알고리즘의 활용, "삼정KPMG", 삼정KPMG 경제연구원, ~ (2018)
- 인공지능의 발전이 경쟁법 집행에 미치는 영향 연구-디지털 카르텔 사례를 중심으로-, "윤창호", 공정거래위원회, ~ (2018)
- 디지털 이코노미와 우리경제의 미래, "한국인터넷기업협회", ~ (2016)
- 공정거래법제 개선 특별위원회 최종 보고서, , 27~ (2018)
- 머니투데이, "김상조 “정보교환도 담합 증거로…달라진 경제 환경 반영”", ~ (2018)
- 공정위 “알고리즘담합, 별도 새규제 없다.”, , 2018
- 전자신문, "‘4차 산업혁명’ 발맞춰 공정거래법 전면 개편…알고리즘담합· 데이터독점도 감시망에", ~ (2018)
- Alison Jones, Brenda Sufrin, "EU Competition Law Text, Cases, and Materials" (2016), Oxford University Press
- Ariel Ezrachi, "Virtual Competition" (2016), Harvard University Press
- Daniel J. Glifford, "The Atlantic Divide in Antitrust: An Examination of US and EU Competition Policy" (2015), University of Chicago Press
- Elenor M. Fox, "EU Competition Law: Cases, Texts and Contexts" (2017), Edward Elgar Publishing
- Herbert Hovenkamp, "Principles of Antitrust" (2017), West Academic Publishing
- Richard Whish, "Competition Law" (2018), Oxford University Press
- Sandra Marco Colino, "Competition Law of the EU and UK" (2011), Oxford Press University
- 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, 7 (2016)
- Ariel Ezrachi, "Artificial Intelligence & Collusion: When Computers Inhibit Competition" (2017), University of Illinois Law Review
- Aurélien Portuese, "European Algorithmic Antitrust and Resale Price Maintenance: Asus, Denon & Marantz, Philips, and Pioneer Decisions", CPI (2018)
- Competition Law at the Crossroads in the Digital Economy:Is It All About Google?, "Gintare Surblyte", Max Planck Institute for Innovation, ~, pp.Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Research PaperNo. 15-13 (2015)
- Michal S. Gal, "Algorithmic-facilitated coordination: Market and Legal Solutions", CPI Antitrust Chronicle (2017)
- Michal S. Gal, "Algorithmic Consumers", aHarvard Journal of Law & Technology, 30 (2017)
- Algorithms and Collusion: Competition Policy in the Digital Age, "OECD", ~ (2017)
- Salil K. Mehra, "Antitrust and the Robo-Seller: Competition in the Time of Algorithms" (2016), Minnesota Law Review
- Terrell McSweeny, "Algorithms and Coordinated Effects" (2017), University of Oxford Center for Competition Law and Policy Oxford
- EU Perspective on Anti-Competitive Algorithm Behavior, "Are Antitrust Laws Up to the Task? A US", pp.2017, Annabel Wilson
- "Algorithms and Competition, Bundeskartellamt 18th Conference on Competition" (2017)
- CMA Press Release, "Online seller admits breaking competition law", ~ (2016)
- DOJ Justice News, "Former-E-Commerce Executive Charged with Price Fixing in the Antitrust Division’s First ONlikne Marketplace Prosecution", ~ (2015)
- European Commission, "Antitrust: Commission fines four consumer electronics manufacturers for fixing online resale prices", Press release, ~ (2018)
- Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, "Pricing algorithms: the digital collusion scenarios", ~
- "G20 Digital Economy Development and Cooperation Initiative", ~ (2016)
- Competition (2018) The twenty-second biennial report by the Monopolies Commission in accordance with section 44 paragraph 1 sentence 1 of the German act against restraints of competition, "Monopolkommission", ~
- Nick Passaro, "Uber has an antitrust litigation problem, not an antitrust problem", CPI Antitrust Chronicle May (2018)
- OECD, "Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs Competition Committee, Algorithms and Collusion-Note by the United States (DAF", COMP, pp.2017, 5~
- "Plea agreement between the United States of America and David Topkins", ~ (2015)
- "Report with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (2015", 2013(INL), 2016
- Shearman, "Artificial Intelligence and Algorithms in Cartel Cases: Risks in Potential Broad", ~ (2018)
- Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, "SACL has rendered a decision in the travel agencies’ case", ~ (2016)
- United States v. Airline Tariff Publishing Co, "836 F. Supp. 9, Civil Action No.: 92-2854", ~
- Meyer v. Kalanick, "15 Civ. 9796 (JSR), Opinion and Order of United States District Court, Southern District of New York", ~ (2016)
- Meyer v. Uber Technologies Inc, "868 F.3d 66, 80 (2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 16-2750.)", ~
- "ECJ, 16.12.1975, Joined Cases 4048, 50, 5456, 111, 113, and 114", 73, 1975
- "Case Comp", 37.975PO, pp.2003, ~
- "Case C-74", 14. Judgment of the Court(Fifth Chamber), 2016
- "Case AT.39740-Google Search(Shopping)", ~ (2017)
- "Case AT.40465-Asus", ~
- "Case AT.40469-Denons&Marantz", ~
- "Case AT.40181-Philips", ~
- "Case AT.40182-Pioneer", ~