Abstract
With regard to EU and Austrian competition law, the term ‘online sales platforms’ might be easily misunderstood. Based on competition law practice (as outlined below), the term ‘online sales platforms’ in general is interpreted narrowly. Following such narrow approach, these platforms are exclusively equated with ‘third party online sales platforms’ of providers like Amazon or eBay. However, for the purposes of this report, the concept of online sales platforms includes all new digital economy in general, irrespective of whether the provider exclusively offers online platform services or not. Therefore, in this national report, the term ‘online sales platform’ follows that broad concept, including new digital economy as such. If ‘third party online sales platforms’ are specifically referred to, this report considers online sales platforms in the narrow sense.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Bundesgesetz vom 5.7.2005 gegen Kartelle und andere Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen (Kartellgesetz 2005), BGBl I Nr. 61/2005 idF BGBl I Nr. 56/2017.
- 2.
Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung einer Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde (Wettbewerbsgesetz—WettbG), BGBI I Nr. 62/2002 idF BGBl. I Nr. 56/2017.
- 3.
With regard to the Austrian approach concerning abuse of market dominance in detail, see Chapter 2 Austria, by G. Fussenegger, F. Schuhmacher and R. Tahedl, in: Këllezi, Kilpatrick and Kobel (eds), Abuse of Dominant Position and Globalization & Protection and Disclosure of Trade Secrets and Know-How, Springer 2017.
- 4.
See Cartels and Abuse Control. https://www.en.bwb.gv.at/CartelsAbuseControl/Seiten/default.aspx. Accessed 10 July 2017.
- 5.
See Supreme Cartel Court, decision of 11 November 2012, 16 Ok 1/12.
- 6.
See Supreme Court, decision of 13 March 2012, 10 Ob 10/12m.
- 7.
Cf., Commission Notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law OJ 1997 C 372 p. 5, para 15.
- 8.
Cf., A. Hiersche and A. T. Mayer, Die Ermittlungen der Europäischen Kommission gegen Google: Auf der Suche nach dem Produktmarkt, Marktmacht und Missbrauch (Teil I und Teil II), ÖZK 2016, 203.
- 9.
Cartel Supreme Court, decision of 21 December 2016, 16 Ok 11/16b.
- 10.
See Sect. 3.1.5.2 below.
- 11.
Cartel Court, decision of 25 March 2014, 27 Kt 20/14.
- 12.
Cartel Court, decision of 26 March 2013, 29 Kt 26/13-6.
- 13.
Cartel Court, decision of 23 April 2014, 26 Kt 19/14.
- 14.
Cartel Court, decision of 21 May 2014, 24 Kt 17/14.
- 15.
Cartel Court, decision of 09 September 2015, 24 Kt 35/15.
- 16.
Cartel Court, decision of 01 December 2015, 29 Kt 34/15.
- 17.
Cartel Court, decision of 14 November 2016, 25 Kt 6/16v.
- 18.
See Austrian Unfair Competition Act, Annex, para 32 in conjunction with § 1a (4) Austrian Unfair Competition Act, according to which the unlawful agreement shall be null and void; see also § 7 Austrian Price Indication Act.
- 19.
Gesetzesnovelle UWG und Preisauszeichnungsgesetz; Stellungnahme der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde, of 29 June 2016. https://www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/VHG/XXV/SNME/SNME_07075/imfname_543571.pdf. Accessed on 11 July 2017.
- 20.
Cartel Court, decision of 14 November 2016, 25 Kt 6/16.
- 21.
CJEU, case C-230/16, Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany), Coty Germany GmbH v Parfümerie Akzente GmbH.
- 22.
CJEU, case C-230/16, Coty Germany GmbH v Parfümerie Akzente GmbH, Opinion of Advocate General Wahl, delivered on 26 July 2017.
- 23.
CJEU, case C-439/09, Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmétique SAS v Président de l’Autorité de la Concurrence and Others, ECLI:EU:C:2011:649.
- 24.
Guidelines on Vertical Restraints, OJ2010 C 130, p. 1, para 54.
- 25.
See, e.g., J. Schultze, St. Pautke and D. Wagener, Vertikal-GVO, Praxiskommentar, 3rd ed, Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft, para 773.: ‘The manufacturer’s granted choice to prohibit its distributors the sale via third party plattforms within the scope of the vertical Block Exemption Regulation 330/2010 is of substantial practical importance’.
- 26.
European Commission (2017) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, para 41; {SWD (2017) 154 final}; http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/sector_inquiry_final_report_en.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2017.
- 27.
Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf, Decision of 5 April 2017, VI Kart 13/15 [V].
- 28.
European Commission (2017) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, {SWD (2017) 154 final}; http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/sector_inquiry_final_report_en.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2017.
- 29.
European Commission (2017), Commission Staff Working Document, Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Final report on the E-commerce Sector Inquiry {COM(2017) 229 final}; http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/sector_inquiry_swd_en.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2017.
- 30.
Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde (2016), Stellungnahme der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde zum Zwischenbericht der Europäischen Kommission über die Sektoruntersuchung zum elektronischen Handel; http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/e_commerce_files/bundeswettbewerbsbehorde_de.pdf. Accessed 16 September 2016.
- 31.
Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Wirtschaft (2016), Mittelstandsbericht 2016, Bericht über die Situation der kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen der österreichischen Wirtschaft; https://www.en.bmwfw.gv.at/Enterprise/Documents/Mittelstandsbericht_barrierefrei_15.11_Version3.pdf. Accessed November 2016.
- 32.
European Commission (2017) Press release; Antitrust: Commission opens three investigations into suspected anticompetitive practices in e-commerce; http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-201_en.htm. Accessed 2 February 2017.
- 33.
European Commission (2017) Press release; Antitrust: Commission opens three investigations into suspected anticompetitive practices in e-commerce; http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-201_en.htm. Accessed 2 February 2017.
- 34.
The undertakings concerned are Valve Corporation, owner of the Steam game distribution platform, and five PC video game publishers, namely Bandai Namco, Capcom, Focus Home, Koch Media and ZeniMax.
- 35.
European Commission (2017) Press release, Antitrust: Commission opens formal investigation into distribution practices of clothing company Guess; http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1549_en.htm. Accessed 6 June 2017.
- 36.
Presentation by Julia Topel at the Conference ‘Towards a digital Single Market: Competition law has parts to play’ of the Association of European Competition Law Judges in Vienna.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ablasser-Neuhuber, A., Fussenegger, G. (2018). Austria. In: Kilpatrick, B., Kobel, P., Këllezi, P. (eds) Antitrust Analysis of Online Sales Platforms & Copyright Limitations and Exceptions. LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71419-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71419-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71418-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71419-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)