"Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Online Transactions" Soliciting Opinions: Clearly prohibiting e-commerce platforms from "choosing one"

　　The State Administration for Market Regulation solicits opinions on the "Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Online Transactions": it is clearly prohibited to "choose one of the two" on e-commerce platforms

　　Chinanews, Beijing, October 20th (Reporter Wang Qingkai) Substantial progress has been made in regulating the “choice of two” e-commerce platforms.

　　Article 31 of the latest version of the "Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Online Trading (Draft for Comment)" issued by the State Administration for Market Regulation on the 20th clearly states that online trading platform operators must not abuse their dominant position to interfere with the independent operations of operators on the platform, The business cooperation between the operators on the platform and other platforms imposes unreasonable restrictions or imposes unreasonable conditions.

　　If this draft is finally put into effect, it means that the relevant departments will take action to supervise the “choose one” behavior of e-commerce platforms.

　　The so-called "choice of two" means that some e-commerce companies require merchants to only provide goods or services on this platform, and must not or in disguise require that merchants not operate on other platforms at the same time.

　　In recent years, “choose one” disputes between online e-commerce platforms have often entered public opinion issues.

Just in September, Ai Inventory accused Vipshop of forcing merchants to "choose one."

Prior to this, there were also food delivery platforms such as Gome and Suning, JD and Suning, JD and Dangdang, and even Meituan and Ele.me.

It can be traced back to the "3Q war" between Tencent and 360.

　　But does the mandatory "choice of two" for e-commerce platforms touch the bottom line of the law?

E-commerce platforms have their own opinions, and legal experts also have different opinions.

Some people say that this is to bully the big and the strong to bully the weak, which is suspected of illegal monopoly. Others think that the e-commerce platform "choose one" is in line with business logic.

　　The draft for solicitation of comments clarifies that operators on the platform can independently choose to carry out business activities on multiple platforms.

Regarding matters related to the establishment or modification of the exclusive business partnership between the platform and the operators on the platform, fair negotiations shall be conducted on an equal basis, and the cooperation conditions, the obligations of both parties, and the liabilities for breach of contract shall be clearly agreed in written form.

　　Many legal experts told reporters from Chinanews.com that it is more difficult to regulate "choosing one" according to the existing "Anti-Monopoly Law" and "E-Commerce Law".

　　Xue Jun, deputy dean of Peking University Law School and director of the E-commerce Law Research Center, told Chinanews.com that the threshold is actually very high for the legal regulation of “choose one out of two” behaviors and must face extremely complicated relevant market definitions. , Market share determination and identification of abuse.

　　In fact, the determination of commercial monopoly on a global scale is a difficult problem.

The complexity of the Internet industry further increases the difficulty of monopoly determination.

Taking the famous "3Q War" as an example, the Supreme Court of China still ruled that Qihoo 360 lost the lawsuit against the background that Tencent QQ occupies an absolute dominance in the Internet social field.

Up to now, China has not produced a case of anti-monopoly administrative enforcement investigations in the Internet field.

　　Moreover, e-commerce platforms now require merchants to "choose one of the two" more covertly, which has evolved from a clear requirement at the beginning to a suggestion.

If merchants do not follow suit, the platform will directly use technical means to search for merchants, lower their rights and block them.

　　However, this consultation draft has a clear statement on this-the platform must not force the operators on the platform to accept it through unreasonable search rights, remove products, restrict operations, block stores, and increase service charges.

　　According to industry insiders, this is an important step taken by the relevant departments to regulate the "choice of two".

　　The bottom line for businesses to "choose one of two" should not harm consumers.

Xue Jun believes that if "choice of two" does bring about serious consequences, we should try to strictly control rather than entangle the application of the law.

"If there are very serious negative consequences, they should be strictly controlled, and there is no need to label a monopoly or unfair competition before action can be taken."

　　This consultation draft clarifies that if the platform proposes to establish or change the exclusive business cooperation relationship and cause losses to the operators on the platform, the operators on the platform shall be reasonably compensated.

　　Liu Xiaochun, executive director of the Internet Rule of Law Research Center of the University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the reporter of Chinanews.com that if relevant departments can quickly settle the disputes that linger in the industry, they will regulate and maintain the development order of the Chinese e-commerce industry. Consumer interests are of great benefit.

(Finish)