競爭監管新時代──歐盟數位市場法之運作成效觀察與評析

A New Era of Competition Regulation: Observations on the Effectiveness and Challenges of the EU Digital Markets Act

事前競爭監管近年成為因應大型數位平臺崛起對市場競爭所生影響的重要對策，首開先河的歐盟數位市場法（DMA）實施以降，現時計有七家科技巨擘提供的23項核心平臺服務為執委會指定為守門人。針對DMA法定義務之落實，執委會可採取「規範對話程序」明示事業應採取之法遵措施，而未於受指定後6個月內落實規範要求的守門人，則將啟動「違法調查程序」並對確認違反之事業進行處罰。本文針對現時可見的規範對話、違法調查與處罰之實際案例進行詳盡分析，並分析其後續影響與可能發展。作為無前例可循的新法，DMA具備強化時效性、形塑確定性以及降低競爭執法成本等正面效益，然其亦存有對歐盟經濟反向造成損害，以及事業可能假DMA從事反競爭行為等負面影響。本文研究發現中長期左右DMA成效的關鍵課題有二，其一是能否因應數位經濟市場快速更迭特質，其二則是能否助益歐洲扶植具競爭力之本地平臺，並對應前揭議題梳理指出歐盟自身之發展隱憂。DMA對境外事業及各國展現的影響力亦是重要觀察指標，本文認為現時成為DMA主要規範對象的美國科技巨擘，事實上亦可能成為最大受益者。此外，儘管已有受歐盟DMA啟發所制定之事前競爭監管內國立法，惟DMA能否如同GDPR般取得廣泛成功，本文認為尚屬未定，蓋各國數位經濟暨數位平臺發展狀況每有不同之下，各國受歐盟啟迪之餘，是否及如何發展適合自身需求的事前競爭監管立法，殊值持續關注。

Ex-ante competition regulation has, in recent years, emerged as a pivotal regulatory response to the impact of the rise of large digital platforms on market competition. Following the implementation of the European Union’s pioneering Digital Markets Act (DMA), the European Commission has, to date, designated 23 core platform services provided by seven major technology undertakings as“gatekeepers.”With respect to the enforcement of statutory obligations under the DMA, the Commission may adopt“specification proceedings”to clarify the compliance measures that designated undertakings are required to implement. Where an undertaking fails to comply with such requirements within six months of designation, the Commission may initiate“non-compliance investigations”and impose sanctions upon a finding of infringement. This article provides a detailed analysis of currently observable cases involving regulatory specification, non-compliance investigations, and enforcement penalties, and further examines their subsequent implications and potential developments. As a novel regulatory framework without prior precedent, the DMA offers several advantages, including enhanced timeliness of intervention, increased legal certainty, and reduced enforcement costs in competition law. However, it also entails potential adverse effects, such as possible negative impacts on the EU economy and the risk that undertakings may strategically exploit the DMA framework to engage in anti-competitive conduct. The findings of this study indicate that two key issues will determine the medium- to long-term effectiveness of the DMA. First, whether it can adequately respond to the rapidly evolving dynamics of the digital economy; and second, whether it can effectively contribute to fostering competitive domestic platforms within Europe. In light of these issues, this article further identifies underlying concerns regarding the future trajectory of EU regulatory development. The DMA’s extraterritorial impact on non-EU undertakings and its influence on other jurisdictions also constitute important indicators for observation. This article argues that U.S. technology giants—currently the primary targets of DMA regulation—may, in fact, ultimately become its principal beneficiaries. Moreover, although several jurisdictions have already introduced ex-ante competition regulatory regimes inspired by the DMA, it remains uncertain whether the DMA will achieve widespread global success comparable to that of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Given the significant variations in the development of digital economies and platform markets across jurisdictions, it remains an open and critical question whether—and how—countries, while drawing inspiration from the EU model, will develop ex ante competition regulatory frameworks tailored to their own specific needs.