Privacy, misinformation and competition in the social media age

Privacy, misinformation and competition in the social media age





Professor Suzanne Rab was interviewed this morning on BBC Business Live as social media firms are to be placed under a new statutory duty of care in the UK, and risk prosecutions, fines or even bans from operating if they fail to protect their users from unacceptable content. 



The question of whether existing regulation is adequate to make social media companies take more responsibility has been raised in a number of areas prompting concerns over privacy, misinformation and competition.

In the wake of Facebook's latest results announcement it is clear that negative publicity and regulatory attention has not affected its growth, whether in terms of subscriber numbers, revenues or profits. 

The truth is that even though comparisons have been made with monopolies of the past, the world has not yet seen anything quite like the social media phenomenon where Facebook alone interacts with one in three people across the globe.  This has prompted calls for tougher regulation and even break-up.  However, passing laws to make social media companies police the internet brings with it other concerns.  Let's not be deluded that any law that orders a company to remove unacceptable content will face objections from proponents of free speech. Where the court making the judgment is from a country where the rule of law is cherished, we might not object.   But that cannot be said of all regimes globally who want to take proactive steps to counter what they perceive is objectionable content.



Please find below links to reporting on the interview.





https://www.linkedin.com/posts/serle-court_suzanne-rab-bbc-interview-social-media-activity-6595607396167499777--ADP

https://twitter.com/Serle_Court/status/1189842170406154240?s=20
http://www.serlecourt.co.uk/news/article/suzanne-rab-bbc-interview-social-media-firms-to-be-placed-under-a-new-statutory-duty-of-care-in-the-uk

CMA imposes £36 million fines on concrete products suppliers

CMA imposes £36 million fines on concrete products suppliers

The Competition and Markets Authority has fined FP McCann Ltd, Stanton Bonna Concrete Ltd and CPM Group Ltd a total of £36 million for infringing the Chapter I prohibition of the Competition Act 1998 and Article 101 TFEU.

The CMA finds that the companies were involved in a price fixing and market sharing cartel in relation to the supply of pre-cast concrete draining products to the construction industry. The CMA notes that these supplies are important for a number of sectors in the UK including the utilities and house building sectors.  It is likely that private and public sector purchasers suffered harm as a result.

The CMA found that the arrangements involved exchanged of competitively sensitive market information over the period 2006 – 2013 and involved senior executives at the companies.

The investigation started in 2013 with the launch by the Office of Fair Trading of a criminal case leading to a cartel offence guilty plea.  The CMA opened a civil investigation in 2017, although no further criminal charges have been sought to date.  This dual-track enforcement – both criminal and civil – illustrates the range of tools that the CMA has at its disposal to deal with cartel activity.

No jurisdiction to hear patent licensing competition claim against Philips

No jurisdiction to hear patent licensing competition claim against Philips

 

The High Court has upheld applications by the defendants in a claim alleging abuse of dominance in breach of Article 102 TFEU and the Chapter II prohibition concerning licensing of standard essential patents.

The claimants (Vestel UK) alleged that Advance Limited (Advance), and Koninklijke Philips NV (Philips), infringed competition law by offering licences for patents, essential in the manufacture of televisions, on terms that were not fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory.

The High Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction in relation to Vestel's claim against Philips under Article 7(2) of the Recast Brussels Regulation.  It had not been established that Vestel has suffered or will suffer damage as a result of the pleaded abuse.

As to Advance, the High Court concluded that the claimants had not shown that any of the jurisdictional gateways in CPR Practice Direction 6B had been satisfied. It had not been established that any damage would be sustained in England.

Vestel Elektronik Sanayi VE Ticaret AS and Vestel UK Limited v HEVC Advance LLC and Koninklijke Philips NV [2019] EWHC 2766 (Ch)

National competition authorities seek stronger powers to impose remedies in digital markets

National competition authorities seek stronger powers to impose remedies in digital markets




National competition authorities in Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands have called for the European Commission to allow remedies to be imposed on companies operating in the digital sector without a finding of a breach of competition law.

A joint memorandum made public by the Benelux authorities states that the enforcers seek to further the debate on competition in digital markets and urge the Commission to introduce ex ante regulation and revise merger control rules.

The memo highlights that a challenge with the current EU antitrust system is that the rules apply ex post once there has been a finding of infringement.  They argue that intervention may come too late in digital markets once the market has tipped in favour of a dominant technology. They call for tougher ex ante powers to take action to pre-empt an adverse market outcome.

The authorities have also asked the Commission to conduct an economic study on merger control in digital markets to examine whether the current rules should be revised. They offer potential changes to EU merger control including a reversal of the burden of proof in digital mergers. This would require the acquirer to show that the merger is pro-competitive as the price for clearance. Currently, the Commission must show that the merger gives rise to a serious impediment to effective competition in order to prohibit it. 

The joint memorandum can be found here:

https://www.abc-bma.be/sites/default/files/content/download/files/bma_acm_cdlcl.joint_memorandum_191002.pdf

CMA sends statement of objections to Fender alleging online resale price maintenance

CMA sends statement of objections to Fender alleging online resale price maintenance



The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has issued a statement of objections alleging that Fender Musical Instruments Europe Limited operated a policy between 2013 and 2018 which required its guitars to be sold at or above a minimum price.

The CMA alleges that this practice, known as resale price maintenance or “RPM”, restricted competitive online pricing by independent retailers.

At this stage, the CMA’s findings are provisional and the CMA is considering representations from Fender before it reaches a final decision on whether there has been a breach of the Chapter I prohibition/Article 101 TFEU.

In the past three years the CMA has sanctioned a number of other companies for online RPM in diverse sectors including digital piano and keyboards, light fittings, bathroom fittings and commercial refrigeration.

CMA requires divestment in Ecolab/Holchem merger

CMA requires divestment in Ecolab/Holchem merger

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has published its final report on its merger investigation of the completed acquisition by Ecolab Inc. of The Holchem Group Limited.

Ecolab and Holchem are among the largest suppliers of formulated cleaning chemicals to the food and beverage sector in the UK.

The CMA finds that the merger may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition in the market for the supply of formulated cleaning chemicals to UK food and beverage customers.

The CMA identified competition concerns due to an expected increase in prices, a reduction in quality or customer services and a reduction in innovation and the range of services offered.

The CMA has required Ecolab to divest Holchem Laboratories Limited to address the “very serious” adverse effects of the merger it has identified.

Source:  https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cleaning-chemicals-firm-must-sell-acquired-business

European Commission probes Thomas Cook’s subsidiary rescue under State aid rules

European Commission probes Thomas Cook’s subsidiary rescue under State aid rules



Germany has announced that it is in “constructive talks” with the European Commission over whether an anticipated loan of EUR380 million to Condor Airlines amounts to State aid.

Condor’s parent company Thomas Cook went under compulsory liquidation last week after lenders refused to fund a rescue by its largest shareholder, Fosun.

The German federal and state governments agreed to grant a temporary loan to support the German subsidiary subject to advance State aid clearance.

Germany reports that it expects the loan to be approved under the State aid rules citing an earlier rescue package of EUR170 million granted to Air Berlin in 2017. 

It has been asked why a similar option was not open to the UK to bailout the parent company.  In short, the scale of the parent company’s financial difficulties meant that the prospects of returning it to long-term financial health were remote.  State aid of this nature can only usually be granted as a rescue measure once all market options have been exhausted, on a temporary basis and in combination with a repayment schedule.