Advertisement

Searching for a Definition of the Collaborative Economy in the European Union

  • Marco Inglese
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter introduces the main actors involved in typical, triangular collaborative economy transactions: an online platform, a service provider and a user/consumer (otherwise known as a ‘prosumer’). It then focuses on the concept of remuneration, thereby stressing—congruently with the scope and aim of the book—that, in light of the consolidated case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding internal market freedoms, only gainful economic activities are considered relevant for the purposes of the collaborative economy in the European Union (EU) legal order. However, gathering and exploiting personal data, through so-called ‘freemium’ mechanisms, represent forms of sui generis remuneration, worthy of specific attention. The chapter concludes by exploring the applicability of the Information Society Services Directive and the Database Directive. Finally, this chapter presents a first appraisal of the most recent case law of the CJEU in the so-called Uber saga as well as initiates a discussion on the opinion of Advocate General Szpunar in the Airbnb case.

Keywords

Online platforms Service providers Users Remuneration Information society services directive and e-commerce directive 

References

  1. Aloni E (2016) Pluralizing the sharing economy. Wash Law Rev 91(4):1397–1459Google Scholar
  2. Barnard C (2008) Unravelling the services directive. Common Mark Law Rev 45(3):323–394Google Scholar
  3. Barnard C (2016) The substantive law of the EU. The four freedoms, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beretta G (2017) Taxation of individuals in the sharing economy. Intertax 45(1):1–11Google Scholar
  5. Berke D (2016) Products liability in the sharing economy. Yale J Regul 33(2):603–653Google Scholar
  6. Botsman R, Rogers R (2011) What’s mine is yours: how collaborative consumption is changing the way we live. HarperCollins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown Hayat N (2018) Accommodating bias in the sharing economy. Brook Law Rev 83(2):613–645Google Scholar
  8. Busch C, Schulte-Nölke H, Wiewiórowska-Domagalska A, Zoll F (2016) The rise of the platform economy: a new challenge for EU consumer law? J Eur Consum Mark Law 5(1):3–10Google Scholar
  9. Catchpole J (2001) The regulation of electronic commerce: a comparative analysis surrounding the principles of establishment. Int J Law Inform Technol 9(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cauffman C (2016) The Commission’s European agenda for the collaborative economy – (too) platform and service provider friendly? Eur Common Mark Law 5(6):235–243Google Scholar
  11. Davies G (2007) The services directive: extending the country of origin principle, and reforming public administration. Eur Law Rev 32(2):232–245Google Scholar
  12. De Baere G (2004) Is this a conflict of rule which I see before me? Looking for a hidden conflict rule in the principle of origin as implemented in primary European Community law and in the “Directive on Electronic Commerce”. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 11(3):287–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Franceschi A (2018) Uber Spain and the “identity crisis” of online platforms. Eur Common Law 7(1):1–4Google Scholar
  14. De Stefano V (2016) The rise of the “just-in-time” workforce: on demand work, crowdwork and labour protection in the “gig economy. ILO Conditions of work and employment series no. 71Google Scholar
  15. Eckhardt GM, Bardhi F (2015) The sharing economy isn’t about sharing at all. HBR http://hbr.org/2015/01/the-sharing-economy-isnt-about-sharing-at-all
  16. Enchelmaier S (2011) Always at your service (within limits): the ECJ’s case law on Article 56 TFEU (2006-2011). Eur Law Rev 36(5):615–650Google Scholar
  17. Farah Y (2009) Electronic contracts and information society services under the E-Commerce Directive. J Internet Law 12(12):3–14Google Scholar
  18. Finck M (2018) Digital co-regulation: designing a supranational legal framework for the platform economy. Eur Law Rev 43(1):47–68Google Scholar
  19. Hatzopoulos V (2008) Assessing the Services Directive (2006/123/EC). Cambridge Yearb Eur Legal Stud 10(1):215–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hatzopoulos V (2012) Regulating services in the European Union. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hatzopoulos V (2013) The Court’s approach to services (2006–2012): from case law to case load? Common Mark Law Rev 50(2):459–501Google Scholar
  22. Hatzopoulos V (2018a) The collaborative economy and EU law. Hart, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Hatzopoulos V (2018b) La première prise de position de la Cour en matière d’économie collaborative. Rev trim droit eur 13(1):273–285Google Scholar
  24. Hatzopoulos V, Do TU (2006) The case law of the ECJ concerning the free provision of services: 2000–2005. Common Mark Law Rev 43(4):923–991Google Scholar
  25. Hatzopoulos V, Roma S (2017) Caring for sharing? The collaborative economy under EU law. Common Mark Law Rev 54(1):81–128Google Scholar
  26. Hojnik J (2016) The servitization of industry: EU law implications and challenges. Common Mark Law Rev 53(6):1575–1624Google Scholar
  27. Hultmark Ramberg C (2001) The ecommerce Directive and formation of contract in a comparative perspective. Eur Law Rev 26(5):429–450Google Scholar
  28. Janczuk-Gorywoda A (2016) Online platforms as providers of transnational payments law. Eur Rev Priv Law 24(2):223–251Google Scholar
  29. Katz V (2015) Regulating the sharing economy. Berkeley Technol Law J 30(4):1067–1126Google Scholar
  30. Kaufman Winn J, Haubold J (2002) Electronic promises: contract law reform and ecommerce in a comparative perspective. Eur Law Rev 27(5):567–588Google Scholar
  31. Kullmann M (2018) Platform work, algorithmic decision-making, and EU gender equality law. Int J Comp Labour Law Ind Relat 34(1):1–22Google Scholar
  32. Leong N, Belzer A (2017) The new public accommodations: race discriminations in the platform economy. Geo Law J 105:1271–1322Google Scholar
  33. Lopez-Tarruella A (2001) A European Community regulatory framework for electronic commerce. Common Mark Law Rev 38(6):1337–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Manzini P (2017) Uber: tra concorrenza e regolazione del mercato. DdT 30(1):79–92Google Scholar
  35. Micklitz HW, Reich N (2009) Cronica de una muerte anunciada: the commission proposal for a “directive on consumer rights”. Common Mark Law Rev 46(2):471–519Google Scholar
  36. Mortelmans K (1998) The common market, the internal market and the single market: what’s in a market? Common Mark Law Rev 35(1):101–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mostacci E, Somma A (eds) (2016) Il caso Uber. La sharing economy nel confronto tra common law e civil law. Egea, MilanGoogle Scholar
  38. Paulauskaite D, Powell R, Coca-Stefaniak JA, Morrison AM (2017) Living like a local: authentic tourism experiences and the sharing economy. Int J Tourism Res 19(6):619–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pearce G, Platten N (2000) Promoting the information society: the EU directive on electronic commerce. Eur Law J 6(4):363–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Petropoulos G (2016) An economic review of the collaborative economy. In-depth analysis for the IMCO Committee IP/A/IMCO/2016-11, PE 595.358Google Scholar
  41. Ranchordas S (2015) Does sharing mean caring? Regulating innovation in the sharing economy. Minn J Law Sci Technol 16(1):413–475Google Scholar
  42. Rogers B (2015–2016) The social costs of Uber. Univ Chicago Law Rev Dialogue 82:85–102Google Scholar
  43. Santolli BJ (2017) Winning the battle, losing the war: European cities fight Airbnb. George Wash Int Law Rev 49(3):673–709Google Scholar
  44. Schepisi C (2017) Piattaforme digitali e caso Uber dinanzi alla Corte di giustizia: servizio di trasporto urbano o servizio della società dell’informazione? Osservatorio europeo Dir Un Eur, 1–17Google Scholar
  45. Scott I, Brown E (2017) Redefining and regulating the new sharing economy. Univ Pa J Bus Law 19(3):553–599Google Scholar
  46. Simon P (2017) Uber saisi par le droit du marché intérieur. Rev aff eur 28(3):521–532Google Scholar
  47. Smorto G (2015) I contratti della sharing economy. Il Foro Italiano, 221–237Google Scholar
  48. Smorto G (2016) Impulse paper no. 02 on the business authorisation/licensing requirements imposed on peer-providers and platforms in the accommodation/tourism sector in Paris, Rome, Milan and London. Ref. Ares 2558355Google Scholar
  49. Smorto G (2017) Critical assessment of European agenda for the collaborative economy. In-depth analysis for the IMCO Committee IP/A/IMCO/2016-10, PE 595.361Google Scholar
  50. Snell J (2010) The notion of market access: a concept or a slogan? Common Mark Law Rev 47(2):437–472Google Scholar
  51. Sorensen MJ (2016) Private law perspectives on platform services. Eur Common Mark Law 5(1):15–19Google Scholar
  52. Todolì-Signes A (2017) The end of the subordinate worker? The on-demand economy, the gig economy, and the need for protection for crowdworkers. Int J Comp Labour Law Ind Relat 33(2):241–2681Google Scholar
  53. Tovo C (2018) Judicial review of harmonized standards: changing the paradigms of legality and legitimacy of private rulemaking under EU law. Common Mark Law Rev 55(4):1187–1216Google Scholar
  54. Van Cleynenbreugel P (2017) Le droit de l’Union européenne face à l’économie collaborative. Rev trim droit eur 12(4):697–722Google Scholar
  55. Van Eecke P (2011) Online service providers and liability: a plea for a balanced approach. Common Mark Law Rev 48(5):1455–1502Google Scholar
  56. Walden I (2001) Regulating electronic commerce: Europe in the global e-conomy. Eur Law Rev 26(6):529–547Google Scholar
  57. Weatherill S (2012) The consumer right directive: how and why a quest for “coherence” has (largely) failed. Common Mark Law Rev 49(6):1279–1318Google Scholar
  58. Wills G (2017) To be or not to Airbnb: regulation of short-term rentals in South Carolina. S C Law Rev 68(4):821–843Google Scholar
  59. Wyman KM (2017) Taxi regulation in the age of Uber. N Y Univ J Legis Public Policy 20(1):1–100Google Scholar
  60. Zou M (2017) The regulatory challenges of “uberization” in China: classifying ride-hailing drivers. Int J Comp Labour Law Ind Relat 33(2):269–294Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Inglese
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Law, Politics and International StudiesUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly

Personalised recommendations