Research On Antimonopoly Law Regulation Of Information Technology Standardization

Extensive application of information technology and the rapid development of information technology makes the information technology market has become the world’s most intense market competition in the field, with the information technology development, information systems development and construction, operation and management of information products and carry out a series of IT standardization in the process, in advance of large companies dominate the market or used for its information technology standards are used by industry contract, standard form of recognition or defacto standards in the field of new entrants to the market innovative small business monopoly, which seed monopolies and technological monopoly is quite similar, but with its own unique form of expression and greater market harm.Paper in Qualcomm anti-monopoly case and national business General announced of business administration organ banned abuse intellectual property excluded, and limit competition behavior of provides of background, to information technology standardization of anti-monopoly regulations business for research perspective, from information technology standardization of concept, nature, role, basic theory starting, detailed described information technology standardization on market competition of effects and the monopoly behavior of main performance, in reference United States, and EU and Japan related legal system of based, Also analyzes China’s anti-monopoly law in the areas of legislation, law enforcement and judicial status and inadequate, of information technology standardization and improvement of Chinese anti-monopoly law proposals.This paper consists of five parts:The first part is the impact of information technology on competition. Through the concepts and features of elaborated information technology standardization, further analysis of the information technology standardization on the positive and negative effects on competition in the market, noted that information technology may lead to monopolies in the market.The second part is the performance and the necessity of anti-monopoly law.First of all, this part on the basis of the previous section, the author analyzes the main form of monopolistic practices in the information technology standardization, including monopolistic practices and standards in the standards-setting enforcement of monopoly.Secondly, through the analysis of antitrust law and regulation method of comparative advantage was obtained against the need for standardization in monopoly, monopoly regulation.The third part is the international comparison and reference of the legal system.United States, European Union and Japan after a long period of judicial practice in legislation, in the regulation of intellectual property and technical standard of monopoly has a lot to learn from the experience.In this section based on a comparative analysis of summarized three is worth referring to the legislative and judicial experience.Part IV is our national information technology standardization status and lack of anti-monopoly law.Anti-monopoly law of China’s existing system has many deficiencies.Among them, the principles of regulation against the abuse of intellectual property rights, does not have the maneuverability;For the technical standardization of monopoly regulation scattered in several legal provisions and regulation is not comprehensive;Although special legislation against intellectual monopoly is underway, due to various reasons, there are still many shortcomings.Part five is the improvement of information technology in anti-monopoly law of China.Perfection, analyzes the technical standardization of legislation regulation mode, put forward the development of China’s intellectual property antitrust regulations and the recommendations of the technical standardization of Antitrust guidelines.Improvement of law enforcement, law enforcement agencies based on information technology standardization problems in antitrust enforcement, and puts forward recommendations for harmonization and unification of law enforcement and correctional law enforcement focus.