ScholarWorks@경상국립대학교

초록

The purpose of this study is to examine the main contents of the U.S. platform package bill, derive the core principles inherent in the bill, and critically examine them. Legislative movements targeting online platforms are actively being carried out in the EU, Germany, and Japan, and Korea is no exception. In the case of the United States, the abolition of the anti-trust package bill gave us an opportunity to take a breather and take a serious look. Although the platform bill has been scrapped in the United States, it is unknown when the situation will change again in the rapidly changing digital economy, and a number of similar bills may be proposed in Korea by referring to the contents of the platform bill. Therefore, it is very timely to critically review the contents of the U.S. platform antitrust package bill and to diagnose its validity, especially by identifying the core principles at the center. This study firstly gives an overview of the U.S. antitrust package bill, and then look at the prohibition of self-preferencing in the "Act on Innovation and Selection of Online Markets," which is of substantial importance. Then the paper reviews the 'Platform Monopoly Ending Act', the 2020 U.S. House Report, and the New Brandise School's main arguments to argue that the basis for banning self-preferential treatment in the U.S. package bill and furthermore, the core principle of the bill lies in the platform's conflict of interest. Subsequently, in order to examine the meaning of the principle of conflict of interest in platform regulation, discussions on conflict of interest in general law, company law, administrative law, and competition law are reviewed, Finally based on this, the US package bill will be critically diagnosed.

키워드