首页> 外文期刊>Information economics and policy >Separation: A Cure for Abuse of Platform Dominance?
【24h】

Separation: A Cure for Abuse of Platform Dominance?

机译:分离:滥用平台优势的治疗方法?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Political candidates, legislators, and academics have made proposals to separate services provided by dominant digital platforms from activities that rely on these services. Although the platforms have different economic and technical characteristics, common themes that motivate these proposals are the incentives of platforms to favor their own products and to suppress investment by imitating rivals. As has been shown in other contexts, this paper demonstrates that structural separation does not eliminate incentives for platforms to discriminate in the provision of service quality. Furthermore, the ability of vertically integrated platforms to imitate rivals does not necessarily harm consumers. Structural or functional separation can address some complaints lodged against activities by dominant platforms, but experience demonstrates that separation requirements are difficult to administer and can harm innovation. Public policy should rely on a mix of antitrust enforcement and regulation to address concerns about privacy, data security, and potential influence of major platforms in politics and the media, as well as the abuse of market power.
机译:政治候选人,立法者和学术学人士提出了从依赖这些服务的活动中分开由主导数字平台提供的服务。虽然该平台具有不同的经济和技术特征,但激励这些提案的共同主题是平台支持自己的产品的激励,并通过模仿竞争对手来抑制投资。正如在其他情况下所示的那样,本文表明,结构分离不会消除平台的激励措施,以提供服务质量。此外,垂直整合平台来模仿竞争对手的能力不一定危害消费者。结构或功能分离可以通过主导平台提出一些投诉,并通过主导平台提出的活动,但体验表明分离要求难以管理,并且可以损害创新。公共政策应依靠反垄断执法和规定的混合来解决对政治和媒体主要平台的隐私,数据安全和潜在影响的担忧,以及滥用市场力量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号