Amazon Faces EU Antitrust Investigation
The probe will examine the way in which Amazon uses the data it collects from independent retailers that sell their products on the Marketplace platform.
July 17, 2019 at 03:07 PM
4 minute read
The European Commission has opened an antitrust investigation of Amazon to determine whether the company is using sales data to gain an unfair advantage over smaller sellers on its Marketplace platform.
Margrethe Vestager, the EU's antitrust chief, said the investigation is warranted because European consumers are increasingly shopping online and e-commerce has boosted retail competition and brought more choice and better prices.
"We need to ensure that large online platforms don't eliminate these benefits through anti-competitive behaviour," she said. "I have therefore decided to take a very close look at Amazon's business practices and its dual role as marketplace and retailer, to assess its compliance with EU competition rules."
The investigation will examine the way in which Amazon uses the data it collects from independent retailers that sell their products on the Marketplace platform. Following a preliminary investigation, the Commission found that this information about sellers, their products and transactions could have implications for competition.
The Commission will focus on standard agreements between Amazon and Marketplace sellers, which allow Amazon's retail business to analyse and use third-party seller data.
It will also study the role of data in the selection of the winners of the 'Buy Box', a special feature that allows shoppers to add items from a retailer directly into their shopping cart. The Commission says that winning the Buy Box is crucial for Marketplace sellers, as the vast majority of transactions are done through it.
In a statement, Amazon said it "will cooperate fully with the European Commission and continue working hard to support businesses of all sizes and help them grow".
The announcement comes on the same day that Amazon announced changes to its third-party seller service agreement, in response to a separate antitrust investigation by German regulators.
Lawyers said Amazon could prove vulnerable in the investigation.
"It is interesting that the Commission is running this case under both Article 101 of the EU Treaty, which prohibits agreements between companies that undermine competition, and Article 102, which deals with abuse of a dominant position," said José Rivas, a partner with Bird & Bird in Brussels. "Amazon may be up for a tough fight with the Commission even if it is not dominant in a given market, on the easier-to-prove basis that Amazon colluded with competitors."
Rivas added that it was "significant" that the Commission alleges that Amazon's continuous collection of data about the activity of competitors and users on its platform allows Amazon's retail business to analyse and use third-party seller data.
The "misuse" of data to foreclose secondary markets has been identified as an area of focus by the report, Competition Policy for the Digital Area, which was recently produced for the Commission, Rivas said.
"The report proposes, with a view to avoid foreclosure of secondary markets, 'an update of the traditional competition law analysis of aftermarkets, which in the present form does not take into account the specificities of data'," he said.
The Commission has set no deadline for completing the probe, which is the latest antitrust action opened by Vestager, who has served as the competition commissioner on the European Commission for the past five years. During her tenure, which is due to end in October, Vestager has fined almost all of the major tech giants, including Google, Qualcomm and Facebook. She was also behind a ruling that forced Apple to pay back $15.4 billion in taxes.
Amazon has had to face challenges by the Commission before. Two years ago, it was told to pay back taxes of about €250 million ($280 million) to Luxembourg because of illegal tax benefits. That same year, it settled with the regulator over its distribution deals with e-book publishers in Europe.
Vestager's mandate as competition commissioner comes to an end in October. However, she has been nominated to a senior position in the European Commission for the next five years, so she may well still influence EU competition policy.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllApple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readDLA Piper, Heuking & Other Key Moves as German Legal Market Reshuffles Ahead of 2025
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Wholesale Real Estate Transaction Transparency and Protection Act Takes Effect Jan. 4: What You Need to Know
- 2Decision of the Day: 'Attorney's Eyes Only' Protective Order Denied; Good Cause Not Demonstrated
- 3The Crypto Guys Seem to Like Paul Atkins as a New SEC Commissioner, but Will He Be Good for the Securities Industry?
- 4Lawsuits, AI Accuracy and Debt: Legal Tech Companies that Ran Into Trouble in 2024
- 5Preemptive Litigation: A Potential Approach for a Precise Situation
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250