Research On Competition Legal Regulations Of Abuse Of Relative Superiority

Since the amendment of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law,and against the background of frequent abuse of relative superiority by Internet enterprises,the academic circles have raised a discussion on the regulation of abuse of relative superiority by operators.The abuse of relative superiority is different from the abuse of dominant market position.They are different in the dimension of market power comparison,the analysis method and the reason of criticism.They belong to totally different theoretical systems.The purpose and significance of this study is to analyze theoretical disputes and differential regulation mode,and to explore the correct position of the system in China's competition law system.Abusing relative superiority can cause direct damage to the rights and interests of relative traders,and also threat the consumers' rights and interests and the market order of fair competition.This behavior has the realistic demand of regulation.From the point of view of the theory of "Need for State Intervention",abuse of relative superiority is a manifestation of market failure,and the adjustment of such behavior by private law such as civil law and contract law is short-sighted and weak.It is necessary to incorporate abuse of relative superiority into the regulation of competition law.Anti-monopoly law and anti-unfair competition law are the two core parts of China's competition law,but they have different value choices in the protection of market order.The way to protect the legal interests of anti-monopoly law is from macro to micro,while the law of anti-unfair competition is from micro to macro.The theory of relative superiority status is incompatible with the value choice and the protection of interests of anti-monopoly law,while the law of anti-unfair competition coincides with the theory.Therefore,it is feasible to place abuse of relative superiority in the regulation of anti-unfair competition law.In horizontal comparison,Germany,Japan,Korea and Taiwan adopt unified regulation mode,separate regulation mode and interpretative regulation mode respectively.Through comparative analysis,the separate regulation mode of Japan and Korea is more suitable for China's national conditions.Therefore,in legislation,the author advocates the establishment of separate provisions in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law to achieve regulatory purposes.In order to alleviate the uncertainty of the application of law,it is necessary to make clear stipulations on the elements of behavior and establish a perfect system of subject and behavior.In order to effectively protect the rights and interests of vulnerable trading subjects,the priority of civil liability should also be established in the liability system.