IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/iprjir/214052.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neutrality, fairness or freedom? Principles for platform regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Bostoen, Friso

Abstract

The need for online platform regulation has been a topic of scholarly debate. However, reality is now catching up to and even overtaking the academic writing on this subject. France has adopted a law on platform fairness, the European Commission recently ordered Google to implement a form of search neutrality, and more regulatory initiatives are on the horizon. That is why we have to look beyond the question whether online platforms should be regulated. As actual regulation supplants the scholarly debate, we must also examine how they are being regulated. This article distils from the various proposals at EU and member state level a set of operational principles that can serve as a frame of reference for productive debate on platform regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Bostoen, Friso, 2018. "Neutrality, fairness or freedom? Principles for platform regulation," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iprjir:214052
    DOI: 10.14763/2018.1.785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/214052/1/IntPolRev-2018-1-785.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.14763/2018.1.785?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    2. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    3. Michael Luca & Timothy Wu & Sebastian Couvidat & Daniel Frank & William Seltzer, 2015. "Does Google Content Degrade Google Search? Experimental Evidence," Harvard Business School Working Papers 16-035, Harvard Business School, revised Aug 2016.
    4. Bertin Martens, 2016. "An Economic Policy Perspective on Online Platforms," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2016-05, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Renda, Andrea, 2015. "Antitrust, Regulation and the Neutrality Trap," CEPS Papers 10472, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    3. Bertin Martens & Frank Mueller-Langer, 2018. "Access to digital car data and competition in aftersales services," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2018-06, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Charlson, G., 2021. "Rating the Competition: Seller Ratings and Intra-Platform Competition," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2106, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Duch-Brown, Néstor & Rossetti, Fiammetta, 2020. "Digital platforms across the European regional energy markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Elliott, M. & Galeotti., A. & Koh., A. & Li, W., 2021. "Market Segmentation Through Information," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2105, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Hyunjin Kim & Michael Luca, 2019. "Product Quality and Entering Through Tying: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 596-603, February.
    8. Martin Peitz, 2024. "The Economic Theory of Two-Sided Platforms," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2024_584, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    9. Tianyu Deng & Limeng Qiao & Xun Yao & Shuangying Chen & Xiaowo Tang, 2022. "A Profit Framework Model for Digital Platforms Based on Value Sharing and Resource Complementarity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    10. MARTENS Bertin, 2020. "An economic perspective on data and platform market power," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2020-09, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Inoue, Yuki, 2021. "Indirect innovation management by platform ecosystem governance and positioning: Toward collective ambidexterity in the ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    12. Paul Belleflamme & Martin Peitz, 2019. "Managing competition on a two‐sided platform," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 5-22, January.
    13. Bertin Martens & Luis Aguiar & Estrella Gomez Herrera & Frank Muller, 2018. "The digital transformation of news media and the rise of disinformation and fake news," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2018-02, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    15. Andreas Hein & Maximilian Schreieck & Tobias Riasanow & David Soto Setzke & Manuel Wiesche & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2020. "Digital platform ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(1), pages 87-98, March.
    16. Liu, He & Li, Xuerong & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of platform research: Developing the research agenda for platforms, the associated technologies and social impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    17. Fabian Schueler & Dimitri Petrik, 2022. "Objectives of platform research: A co-citation and systematic literature review analysis," Papers 2202.08822, arXiv.org.
    18. Yassine Lefouili & Leonardo Madio, 2022. "The economics of platform liability," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 319-351, June.
    19. Martin Peitz, 2023. "Governance and Regulation of Platforms," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_480, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    20. Wu, Mian & (David) Liu, Yulong & Jasimuddin, Sajjad M. & (Justin) Zhang, Zuopeng, 2023. "Rethinking cross-border mobile payment ecosystems: A process study of mobile payment platform complementors, network effect holes and ecosystem modules," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(1).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:iprjir:214052. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://policyreview.info/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.