European Business Organization Law Review

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 785–800 | Cite as

Abuse of Dominance in Non-Negotiable Privacy Policy in the Digital Market

  • Sih Yuliana Wahyuningtyas


Personal data and its use have become the front-line of businesses in the digital market. With the potential to be extracted for information, making this available for various purposes, big data transforms into a powerful tool for data controllers for effective marketing, defining strategic business decisions, and establishing a strong foothold in the market. The use of personal data for targeted marketing exemplifies this. While privacy has been subject to the regime of privacy protection, privacy violation might entangle competition law analysis when it involves abuse of market dominance. This paper addresses these problems by discussing three key issues: first, how competition law addresses the use of personal data as the new frontier of innovation and competition; second, whether big data plays a role to qualify dominance; and third, if non-negotiable policy on privacy infringes the prohibition of dominance abuse under competition law.


Abuse of dominance Non-negotiable privacy policy Competition law Digital market 


  1. Akerlof GA (1970) The market for ‘lemons’: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q J Econ 84(3):488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bundeskartellamt (2016) Bundeskartellamt initiates proceeding against Facebook on suspicion of having abused its market power by infringing data protection rules. 2 March 2016. Accessed 3 Mar 2016
  3. Bundeskartellamt and Autorité de la concurrence (2016a) Competition law and data. 10 May 2016. Accessed 25 Sept 2016
  4. Bundeskartellamt and Autorité de la concurrence (2016b) The French Autorité de la concurrence and the German Bundeskartellamt publish joint paper on data and its implications for competition law. Press Release, 10 May 2016. Accessed 25 Sept 2016
  5. Buttarelli G (2015) Privacy and competition law in digital markets. Speaking points at the European Parliament’s Privacy Platform, Brussels, 25 January 2015. Accessed 24 Feb 2015
  6. Chee FY (2016) Facebook privacy issues may not be competition matters: EU antitrust chief. Reuters, 9 September 2016. Accessed 9 Sept 2016
  7. Choi A, Triantis GG (2012) The effect of bargaining power on contract design. Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series 2012-04Google Scholar
  8. Crocioni P (2008) Leveraging of market power in emerging markets: a review of cases, literature, and a suggested framework. J Compet Law Econ 4(2):449–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cseres KJ (2005) Competition law and consumer protection. Kluwer Law International, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  10. Do QT (2003) Asymmetric information. The World Bank. Accessed 26 Nov 2015
  11. Eachambadi ST (2016) Germany court rules against Facebook ‘like’ button. Jurist, 10 March 2016. Accessed 13 Mar 2016
  12. Evans D (2010) Essays on the economics of two-sided markets: economics, antitrust and strategy. Accessed 6 Mar 2016
  13. Filistrucchi L, et al (2013) Market definition in two-sided markets: theory and practice. TILEC Discussion Paper No 2013-009, Tilburg Law School Research Paper No 09/2013. Accessed 6 Mar 2016
  14. Filistrucchi L, Geradin D, Van Damme E (2012) Identifying two-sided markets. TILEC Discussion Paper No 2012-008. Accessed 6 Mar 2016
  15. Geradin D, Kuschewsky M (2013) Competition law and personal data: preliminary thoughts on a complex issue. Working Paper. Accessed 10 Mar 2016
  16. Gómez Pomar F (2003) EC consumer protection law and EC competition law: how related are they? A law and economics perspective. InDret Working Paper No 113Google Scholar
  17. Haracoglou I (2007) Competition law, consumer policy and the retail sector: the systems’ relation and the effects of a strengthened consumer protection policy on competition. Compet Law Rev 3(2):175–208Google Scholar
  18. Jensen C, Potts C (2003) Privacy policies examine: fair warning or fair game? Accessed 13 Mar 2016
  19. Kimmel L, Kestenbaum J (2014) What’s up with WhatsApp? A transatlantic view on privacy and merger enforcement in digital markets. Antitrust 29(1):48–55Google Scholar
  20. Kuner C et al (2014) When two worlds collide: the interface between competition law and data protection. Int Data Priv Law 4(4):247–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Madill J, Mexis A (2009) Consumers at the heart of EU competition policy. Compet Policy Newsl 1:27–28Google Scholar
  22. Manyika J, McKinsey Global Institute et al (2011) Big data: the next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. Accessed 13 Mar 2016
  23. Moisejevas R, Novosad A (2013) Some thoughts concerning the main goals of competition law. Jurisprudence 20(2):627–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ocello E et al (2015) What’s up with merger control in the digital sector? Lessons from the Facebook/WhatsApp EU merger case. Compet Merger Brief 1(2015):1–7Google Scholar
  25. Stiglitz JE (2001) Information and the change in the paradigm of economics. Nobel Prize Lecture, Columbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, 8 December 2001Google Scholar
  26. Verbrauchenzentrale (2016) Facebook-Like-Button auf Firmen-Websites: Gericht rügt Datenschutzverstoß. 9 March 2016. Accessed 13 Mar 2016
  27. Vestager M (2016) Competition is a consumer issue. Speech addressed at BEUC, 13 May 2016. Accessed 21 Aug 2017

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Senior Researcher and Lecturer at Faculty of LawAtma Jaya Catholic University of IndonesiaJakartaIndonesia

Personalised recommendations