As digital markets evolve, regulators worldwide grapple with the immense power of technology leaders. From search and social media to cloud computing and e-commerce, the dominance of a handful of players raises profound questions about fairness, innovation, and consumer welfare.
Competition policy defines the rules and tools that preserve open markets. It aims to prevent firms from abusing dominant positions and ensure that consumers and enterprises can choose between multiple providers.
In the digital era, platforms often act as gatekeeper platforms in digital economies. They control critical infrastructure—app stores, advertising networks, data analytics frameworks—that new entrants must access to succeed.
In the United States, the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have launched historic antitrust suits against Google, Meta, and Amazon. These cases explore search manipulation, adtech cartels, and alleged exclusionary conduct in e-commerce.
Across the Atlantic, the European Union’s digital markets act (DMA) came into force in March 2025. It imposes ex-ante obligations on six designated gatekeepers—Apple, Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, ByteDance—and authorizes fines up to 10% of global revenue for non-compliance.
Enforcers debate whether imposing practice limits is sufficient or if stronger measures—such as breakups and asset divestitures—are needed. Behavioral conditions can be monitored, but evidence shows they sometimes fail to curb entrenched market power.
Many experts now argue for structural remedies versus behavioral remedies. Divesting units or requiring interoperability may reset market dynamics more effectively than complex enforcement orders.
Traditional antitrust focuses on price effects and static market shares. Yet digital platforms often offer free services, monetized by data and advertising, challenging price-centric analysis.
Schumpeterian economics stresses dynamic competition theory and innovation focus, viewing continuous innovation as central to competition. This perspective drives scrutiny of “killer acquisitions” and data locking strategies that can stifle future challengers.
Recent cases illustrate the stakes of digital antitrust:
Jurisdictions outside the US and EU are following suit. The UK’s Digital Markets Unit and Japan’s forthcoming regime mirror DMA principles by targeting killer acquisitions and market foreclosure risks.
Beyond competition, stakeholders highlight privacy, data rights, and freedom of expression. Civil society groups call for stronger measures to protect user rights privacy and fair access in the digital economy.
Policymakers are advancing proposals to reshape digital markets:
Competition policy in the era of tech giants stands at a crossroads. Regulators must balance innovation incentives with the imperative to prevent abusive conduct that hinders rivals and harms consumers.
By embracing both traditional antitrust tools and forward-looking frameworks centered on dynamic competition, authorities can foster markets that reward creativity, protect user choice, and sustain a vibrant digital ecosystem for years to come.
References
