Are we fiddling while competition processes in the digital economy are "burning"? Not quite, according to the excellent Speakers at a conference which took place today (also online and for free, many thanks), organized by Concurrences. (BTW, this is not a conference debriefing à la D'Kart, so don't expect to be informed while being entertained). The urgency we are in, however, was clearly expressed by Andreas Mundt by saying that "we don't have the time to wait for Court decisions". He also expanded on the many ways in which "his" 19a GWB was way better than the DMA. My conference-tweeting as stream of consciousness starts here. Among the many enriching statements and discussions, voilà some points that were particularly dear to me.
1) The DMA is already part of a broader picture: this was directly recalled by Thibault Schrepel in the first panel and indirectly in the third panel while discussing the competition issues related to the Internet of Things (see the Data Act in particular).
2) In order to properly enforce the DMA, we need a lot of data scientists. A figure, you ask? Out of the 220 staff suggested by Andreas Schwab, at least 50, proposes Yann Guthmann of the French competition authority (#moretechnologicalapproach as advocated since a famous Munich Conference - not that one).
3) Almost everybody still wondered what contestability and fairness actually meant. I would have preferred openness instead of contestability, which economically has a very precise and perhaps not very helpful meaning in this context. But, c'est la vie! At any rate, contestability/openness and fairness point to a process rather than to an outcome (e.g., low prices), which is excellent.
4) Le diable se cache dans les détails of the DMA. Indeed, big date for final negotiations 24th March - lightning speed according to Margrethe Vestager, we'll see...
5) Avis cloud computing of the Adlc: beginning 2023. Competition enforcement only after that date, if necessary? (And: see again Data Act).
6) Lawyers (especially those in private practice) expect aspire to DMA litigations from Day One. This is new stuff, vehemently opposed by some the most powerful companies in the world. Along similar lines, Andreas Mundt is already quite concerned about the Court's (only *one* and not too unresponsive, generally) expectations regarding how Sec. 19a should be applied. Google settled, but what about the other gatekeepers potentially in scope?
7) We need (also) to discuss public interest in the DMA, beyond contestability and fairness.
8) There might even be court-sponsored spillovers from the DMA to competition law (see the Google Shopping ruling for inspiration).
We will again be discussing the DMA next week in Mannheim, I am afraid (exactly on the 24th).
