본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

German Ordoliberalism and the European Union's Competition Laws: The Google Cases

백훈|조희경
한국질서경제학회 (Korea Ordo Economics Association)|2019.12|질서경제저널 (Ordo Economics Journal)|제22권 제4호|pp. 1-30

0

조회

0

다운로드

6

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

경쟁법Ordoliberalism질서자유주의OrdunungspolitikGWBBundeskartellamtCompetition laws프라이부르크 학파시카고 학파

초록

This study compares competition laws in Germany, the EU, and the U.S. to highlight the influence of Ordoliberalism on competition laws. For this purpose, we looked into various EU Commission Decisions and the U.S. Fair Trade Commission's rulings of cases involving anti-competition. The cases of Google are interesting because they show some changes that information technology brought to the business practices which may have some implications regarding competition. We have found that there are key factors considered by the German Bundeskartellamt, the EU Commission, and the U.S. Fair Trade Commission (FTC). We use these factors to investigate how the authorities may go about using these factors to judge the legitimacy of each case. We found that the German authority and the EU Commission are stricter on maintaining competition in their decisions whereas the U.S. antitrust courts and FTC have many other considerations for making their decisions. The Google cases are is very illustrative because the company can be a very innovative business creator with its role as a trailblazer in the high technology industries. It could be seen which part of the competition laws focused on enforcing the competition law. The rulings of FTC and EC were mainly examined. In particular, the case of Google has been investigated for antitrust cases shows various differences such as the main purpose of the characteristics of US and European competition law. That’s why this paper reviewed this case to reveal the main differences in competition law in the United States and Germany and the EU. It was found that Germany and the European Union’s competition laws were influenced by the principles of Ordoliberalism, whereas in the United States, antitrust laws were influenced by the Chicago school.

Abstract

This study compares competition laws in Germany, the EU, and the U.S. to highlight the influence of Ordoliberalism on competition laws. For this purpose, we looked into various EU Commission Decisions and the U.S. Fair Trade Commission's rulings of cases involving anti-competition. The cases of Google are interesting because they show some changes that information technology brought to the business practices which may have some implications regarding competition. We have found that there are key factors considered by the German Bundeskartellamt, the EU Commission, and the U.S. Fair Trade Commission (FTC). We use these factors to investigate how the authorities may go about using these factors to judge the legitimacy of each case. We found that the German authority and the EU Commission are stricter on maintaining competition in their decisions whereas the U.S. antitrust courts and FTC have many other considerations for making their decisions. The Google cases are is very illustrative because the company can be a very innovative business creator with its role as a trailblazer in the high technology industries. It could be seen which part of the competition laws focused on enforcing the competition law. The rulings of FTC and EC were mainly examined. In particular, the case of Google has been investigated for antitrust cases shows various differences such as the main purpose of the characteristics of US and European competition law. That’s why this paper reviewed this case to reveal the main differences in competition law in the United States and Germany and the EU. It was found that Germany and the European Union’s competition laws were influenced by the principles of Ordoliberalism, whereas in the United States, antitrust laws were influenced by the Chicago school.

참고문헌 (43)

  1. Blair, R. D., "The Rule of Reason and the Goals of Antitrust: An Economic Approach", Antitrust Law Journal, 78(2), pp.471~504 (2012)
  2. Buxbaum, H. L., "German legal culture and the globalization of competition Law: a historical perspective on the expansion of private antitrust enforcement", Berkeley Journal of International Law, pp.474~495 (2005)
  3. 조현진, "구글의 시장지배적지위 남용여부에 대한 법적 연구 - 최근 유럽연합 집행위원회의 판단을 중심으로 -", 법과정책연구, 17(3), pp.459~485 (2017), 한국법정책학회[DOI]
  4. 조성국, "인터넷 검색사업자의 경쟁법적 규제에 관한 연구 - 검색중립성 논의와 규제사례 및 그 시사점을 중심으로 -", 경쟁법연구, 31, pp.268~305 (2015), 한국경쟁법학회
  5. 정완, "세계의 경쟁정책 동향과 우리의 대응에 관한 고찰", 경희법학, 46(4), pp.469~496 (2011), 법학연구소
  6. 정남기, "대·중소기업간 동반성장과 독일의 경쟁정책", 경상논총, 34(3), pp.1~16 (2016), 한독경상학회[DOI]
  7. Elzinga, K. G., "The Goals of Antitrust: Other Than Competition and Efficiency, What Else Counts?", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 125(6), pp.1191~1213 (1977)
  8. Eucken, W., "Grundsätze der Wirtschaftspolitik" (1952), utb GmbH
  9. Fox, E. M., "Global competition policy", pp.339~354 (1997)
  10. Gerber, D., "Constitutionalizing the Economy: German Neo-Liberalism, Competition Law and the “New” Europe", The American Journal of Comparative Law, 42(1), pp.25~84 (1994)
  11. Gilbert, R., "The Antitrust Revolution" (2017), Oxford University Press
  12. Han, H., "The Comparison of US and EU Competition Policy", The Journal of Women and Economics, 2(2), pp.87~107 (2006)
  13. Hovenkamp, H., "Distributive Justice and the Antitrust Laws", Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 51(1), pp.1~31 (1982)
  14. Hwang, J., "Ordoliberalism, German social market economy" (2011), Soong-Sil University Publication
  15. Kim, H., "German Social Market Economy" (2018), Seoungyeol You
  16. Kirkwood, J. B., "The fundamental goal of antitrust: Protecting consumers, not increasing efficiency", Notre Dame L. Rev, 84, pp.191~243 (2008)
  17. Kolasky, W. J., "What is competition? A comparison of US and European perspectives", The Antitrust Bulletin, 49(1-2), pp.29~53 (2004)
  18. Lamaj, J., "The evolution of antitrust law in USA", European Scientific Journal, pp.154~166 (2017)
  19. Langford, A., "Monopoly: does search bias warrant antitrust or regulatory intervention?", Indiana Law Journal, 88(4), pp.1559~1592 (2013)
  20. Lee, B., "Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen" (2016), Bobmunsa
  21. Lee, S., "The Goals of Korean Competition Law", Master, pp.2015
  22. Manne, G. A., "The Market Realities that Undermined the FTC's Antitrust Case Against Google", Harvard Journal of Law and Technology Occasional Paper Series (2013)
  23. Mendoza, D. K. O., "Antitrust In The New Economy Case Google Inc. Against Economic Competition on Web. Mexican", Mexican Law Review, 7(2), pp.79~113 (2016)
  24. Niels, G., "Introduction: Antitrust in the U.S. and the EU converging or diverging paths", Antitrust Bulletin, 49(1 & 2), pp.1~28 (2004)
  25. 백훈, "The Influences of Ordo-liberalism in the EU’s Economic and Monetary Policy", 질서경제저널, 19(4), pp.1~22 (2016), 한국질서경제학회[DOI]
  26. 백훈, "Institutionalization of Ordoliberalism in Germany’s Economic Policy", 질서경제저널, 20(4), pp.59~78 (2017), 한국질서경제학회[DOI]
  27. 백훈, "A Case Study of Economic Order in Korea: Any Evidence of Ordunungspolitik?", 질서경제저널, 21(4), pp.173~189 (2018), 한국질서경제학회[DOI]
  28. Searching for Harm or Harming Search?. A Look at the European Commission’s Antitrust Investigation Against Google, "Renda, A.", ~, pp.Centre for European Policy Studies Working Paper, (118) (2015)
  29. The Role for Economic Analysis in the FTC’s Google Investigation, "Salinger, M. A.", ~ (2013)
  30. The Freiburg School: Walter Eucken and Ordoliberalism, "Vanberg, V. J.", ~, pp.(No.04 (2004), 11)Freiburg discussion papers on constitutional economics
  31. Vickers, J., "Abuse of Market Power", Economic Journal, 115(504), pp.F244~F261 (2005)
  32. Waked, D. I., "Antitrust Goals in Developing Countries: Policy Alternatives and Normative Choices", Seattle University Law Review, 38(3), pp.945~1006 (2015)
  33. Winterberg, J. M., "Social market economy in Germany: History, present and future", Paper presented at the international Symposium on Social Market Economy in Germany and Alternative Directions for Korean Society (2006)
  34. "Act against Restraints of Competition 2013" (2013)[URL]
  35. "Statement of VP Almunia on the Google antitrust investigation" (2012)[URL]
  36. "Summary of Commission decision of 27 June 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39740 — Google Search (Shopping))" (2017)[URL]
  37. "Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34billion for illegal practices regarding Android mobile devices to strengthen domi-nance of Google's search engine" (2018)[URL]
  38. "Antitrust: Commission fines Google €1.49billion for abusive practices in online advertising" (2019)[URL]
  39. "Report on Competition Policy 2018" (2019)[URL]
  40. "The contribution of competition policy to growth and the EU 2020 Strategy" (2013)[URL]
  41. "Statement of the Federal Trade Commission Regarding Google’s Search Practices - In the Matter of Google Inc" (2013)[URL]
  42. "'Search Neutrality' by Google Penalty" (2017)[URL]
  43. "Comparative Study of US and EU Competition Laws and Related Systems" (2011)[URL]

관련 논문AI추천

Some Evidences of Ordoliberalism in the EU’s Competition Policy백훈, 강경훈한국질서경제학회 · 질서경제저널2020 · 제23권 제1호A Case Study of Economic Order in Korea: Any Evidence of Ordunungspolitik?백훈한국질서경제학회 · 질서경제저널2018 · 제21권 제4호Institutionalization of Ordoliberalism in Germany’s Economic Policy백훈한국질서경제학회 · 질서경제저널2017 · 제20권 제4호Regulation of Digital Platforms in the EU and GermanyRoland Broemel법학연구소 · 경제규제와 법2022 · 제15권 제1호Ordoliberalism in the German Financial System and the Financial Crisis: A Comparison to the U.S.백훈, 백승헌한국질서경제학회 · 질서경제저널2021 · 제24권 제2호A Critical Review of the EU’s Digital Markets Act - Possible Impacts on the Digital Economy -최요섭법학연구원 · 法學論文集2021 · 제45권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (4건)

금융 자유화와 금융화장태석pp. 31-51보상만족, 역할행동, 조직신뢰 간의 관계백유성pp. 53-72개방화의 중국동북지역 경제에 대한 영향 -Malmquist와 SFA 이용한 효율성 분석 -윤형모pp. 73-93질서자유주의 측면에서 본 오이켄과 스미스김강식pp. 95-112
원문 보기