section 2 briefl y describes the facts of the FBA Amazon case. Section 3 highlights the passages of the decision in which the ICA gives Amazon ’ s conduct diff erent legal characterisations, and we analyse the eff ects of this approach and what makes it legitimate. In section 4 we then discuss and refute a fi rst interpretative hypothesis that qualifying Amazon ’ s conduct as selfpreferencing is independent of any other possible qualifi cation of Amazon ’ s conduct as exclusionary and anticompetitive. In section 5 this is countered with the second interpretative hypothesis that the diff erent classes of exclusionary conduct which the ICA identifi ed in Amazon ’ s behaviour – ie tying in, refusal to deal, and possibly self-preferencing – are autonomous legal characterisations independent of one another. We repudiates this conjecture, and fi nally in section 6 we focus on the interpretative hypothesis that indeed legitimises the FBA Amazon decision: the only legal characterisation that matters in considering exclusionary conduct abusive is the one based on its actual and potential eff ects. In section 7 the role that requirements such as coercion and essentiality should play if the notion of abuse were truly eff ects-based is analysed. Section 8 concludes.

The notion of abuse: cues from the Italian FBA Amazon case

Ghezzi, Federico;Maggiolino, Mariateresa
2024

Abstract

section 2 briefl y describes the facts of the FBA Amazon case. Section 3 highlights the passages of the decision in which the ICA gives Amazon ’ s conduct diff erent legal characterisations, and we analyse the eff ects of this approach and what makes it legitimate. In section 4 we then discuss and refute a fi rst interpretative hypothesis that qualifying Amazon ’ s conduct as selfpreferencing is independent of any other possible qualifi cation of Amazon ’ s conduct as exclusionary and anticompetitive. In section 5 this is countered with the second interpretative hypothesis that the diff erent classes of exclusionary conduct which the ICA identifi ed in Amazon ’ s behaviour – ie tying in, refusal to deal, and possibly self-preferencing – are autonomous legal characterisations independent of one another. We repudiates this conjecture, and fi nally in section 6 we focus on the interpretative hypothesis that indeed legitimises the FBA Amazon decision: the only legal characterisation that matters in considering exclusionary conduct abusive is the one based on its actual and potential eff ects. In section 7 the role that requirements such as coercion and essentiality should play if the notion of abuse were truly eff ects-based is analysed. Section 8 concludes.
2024
9781509969388
Tyagi, Kalpana; Kapperlman, Anselm; Caufmann, Caroline
Digital platforms, competition law, and regulation : comparative perspectives
Ghezzi, Federico; Maggiolino, Mariateresa
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Ch. 2 Ghezzi and Maggliano.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: chapter
Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Publisher's layout)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 762.4 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
762.4 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11565/4061846
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact