|
Anti-Competitive Practices cases
|
| Sana | 13.05.2024 | | Hajmi | 8,97 Kb. | | #228914 |
Bog'liq Anti-Competitive Practices
Anti-Competitive Practices cases
1. Booking Holdings faces a landmark fine from Spanish regulators for anti-competitive practices, as Europe steps up its scrutiny on technology groups in an effort to curb their increasing dominance. Spain’s antitrust watchdog has drawn up a provisional €486mn ($526mn) penalty against Booking, the online travel company. The regulators accused the agency of anti-competitive behaviour such as preventing domestic hotel groups from offering deals that are cheaper on their own sites than the price they offer on booking.com, the US site’s Amsterdam-based subsidiary. Booking has pushed back at allegations of wrongdoing by arguing that allowing higher prices on its website could hurt the consumer, said people familiar with the company’s thinking. The Spanish National Markets and Competition Commission will finalise its decision over the next few months, Booking said on Thursday. “We are disappointed by the [Spanish regulators’] draft decision,” the world’s biggest travel agency by market capitalisation said in a statement, adding that it intends to appeal against the fine if it becomes final. News of the proposed fine comes as regulators from around the world are combing through tech deals in an attempt to control the industry’s growing power, especially when it is to the detriment of local companies. The EU last year blocked Booking’s purchase of Sweden’s flights-only Etraveli, a smaller business that runs brands such as Gotogate and Mytrip. However, Brussels’ decision was at odds with the UK’s previous approval of the deal. The latest move against Booking comes days after Brussels pushed to crack down on Apple with a fine in the region of €500mn for allegedly breaking EU law relating to access to its music streaming services. With this proposed fine from an individual member state, executives at Booking expressed concern that the platform will be hit at both national and EU levels. The 27-member bloc will force large tech companies next month to comply fully with its Digital Markets Act, aimed at opening markets in the region.
2. Google, which has spent years defending itself against claims of monopolistic behavior across the U.S. and Europe, is going public with its own complaint of anti-competitive practices by longtime rival Microsoft. In a letter to the Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday, Google alleged Microsoft uses unfair licensing terms to “lock in clients” to exert control over the cloud-computing market. The letter was sent in response to a broad FTC request for comment on potential anti-competitive acts in the cloud industry. A spokesperson for the FTC declined to comment further. Google singled out Microsoft in the complaint, arguing that through its dominant Windows Server and Microsoft Offices products, the company can make it difficult for its massive roster of clients to use anything but its Azure cloud infrastructure offering. Google described Microsoft’s licensing restrictions as a “complex web” that prevents businesses from diversifying their enterprise software vendors. Google also said such control represents a significant national security and cybersecurity risk. It highlighted successive cyberattacks involving Microsoft products, including the SolarWinds breach. Microsoft and Google both have active cybersecurity practices that respond to and research cyber threats.
Google is no stranger to antitrust concerns. In January, the U.S. Department of Justice filed its second antitrust lawsuit against Google in just over two years, targeting its advertising business.
The department’s earlier lawsuit, filed in October 2020 under the Trump administration, accused Google of using monopoly power to cut off competition for internet search through exclusionary agreements.
“With overly complex agreements that seek to lock in clients to their ecosystems,” Google said, companies such as Microsoft and Oracle “are not only forcing customers toward a monolithic cloud model but also limiting choice, increasing costs for customers, and disrupting growing and thriving digital ecosystems in the U.S. and around the world.” In the 1990s, Microsoft was involved in one of the most notorious antitrust cases in U.S. history. The company was accused of using its dominance in desktop software to push consumers to its internet browser, killing off competition from upstarts such as Netscape. The government won the case, ultimately forcing Microsoft to allow PC makers to use other companies’ browsers.
|
| |
