Mária T. Patakyová – Comenius University in Bratislava, Faculty of Law, Institute of European Law. Šafárikovo nám. č. 6, 810
00 Bratislava, Slovakia
4th International Scientific Conference – EMAN 2020 – Economics and Management: How to Cope With Disrupted Times, Online/Virtual, September 3, 2020, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS published by: Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans, Belgrade, Serbia; ISBN 978-86-80194-30-1, ISSN 2683-4510
Competition law serves as an important tool for regulation of undertakings. In order to
conduct a competition law analysis, one must first define the relevant market. However, this task is
becoming more intricate in today’s digital era, especially in relation to so-called zero-price markets.
These markets are characterised as markets where users of products or services do not pay for the
use, at least they do not pay by money. This paper asks how to define relevant market in such case.
Three methods of relevant market definition are presented, namely qualitative analysis, SSNIP test and
SSNDQ test. The paper briefly explores positive and negative elements of these tests and compares the
findings with the European Commission’s 2019 report. It leads to the answer that qualitative method
might have certain advantages in this regard.
Zero-Price markets, United Brands, Qualitative Method, Characteristics Bases Method,
SSNIP Test, SSNDQ Test, Digital Era Competition Policy.
Botta, M. & Wiedemann, K. (2018). EU Competition Law Enforcement vis-à-vis Exploitative
Commission (1997). Commission Notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of
Community competition law. Official Journal of the European Communities 97/C 372/03.
Conducts in the Data Economy Exploring the Terra Incognita. Max Planck Institute for Innovation
and Competition Research Paper, 18(08), 1-89.
European Commission (2019). Competition policy for the digital era. Luxembourg, Luxembourg:
Publications Office of the European Union.
Ezrachi, A., & Stucke, M. E. (2016). Virtual competition. The Promise and Perils of the Algorithm-
Driven Economy. London, England: Harvard University Press.
Lianos, I. (2019). Competition Law for the Digital Era: A Complex Systems’ Perspective. CLES
Research Paper Series 2019(6), 1-162.
Newman, J.M. (2015). Antitrust in Zero-Price Markets: Foundations. University of Pennsylvania
Law Review, 164, 149-206.
Pereira Neto, C. M. & Lancieri, F. M. (2020, January 28). Towards a layered approach to relevant
markets in multi-sided transaction platforms. Retrieved April 1, 2020, from https://
Pike, C. (2017). Hearing on Rethinking the Use of Traditional Antitrust Enforcement Tools in
Multi-sided Markets, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development DAF/
Stucke, M. E., & Grunes, A. P. (2016). Big Data and Competition Policy. Oxford, United Kingdom:
Oxford University Press.
Colangelo, G. & Maggiolino, M. (2018). Data Accumulation and the Privacy-Antitrust Interface:
Insights from the Facebook case for the EU and the U.S. TTLF Working Papers, 31, 1-43.
Cooper, J. C. & Mason, G. (2013). Privacy and Antitrust: Underpants Gnomes, the First Amendment,
and Subjectivity. George Mason Law Review, 20(4), 1129-1146.
Craig, P., & De Búrca, G, (2011). EU Law. Text, Cases and Materials. Oxford, United Kingdom:
Oxford University Press.
Hartman, R., Teece, D., Mitchell, W., & Thomas Jorde, (1993) Assessing Market Power in Regimes
of Rapid Technological Change. Industrial and Corporate Change 3(2), 317-350
Kerber, W. (2016). Digital markets, data, and privacy: competition law, consumer law and data
protection. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 11(11), 856-866.
Körber, T. (2018, January 29). Is Knowledge (Market) Power? – On the Relationship Between
Data Protection, ‚Data Power’ and Competition Law. Retrieved April 1, 2020, from https://
Liu, Y.-H. (2020, January 17). The Impact of Consumer Multi-homing Behavior on Ad Prices:
Evidence from an Online Marketplace. Retrieved April 1, 2020, from https://papers.ssrn.
Mazúr, J. & Patakyová, M.T. (2019). Regulatory Approaches to Facebook and Other Social Media
Platforms: Towards Platforms Design Accountability. Masaryk University Journal of
Law and Technology, 13(2), 219-241.
OECD (2013). The Role and Measurement of Quality in Competition Analysis. Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development DAF/COMP(2013)17, 1-229.
Preta, A. (2018, October 25). Platform Competition in Online Digital Markets. Retrieved April
1, 2020, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3272839.
Whish, R., & Bailey, D. (2012). Competition Law. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University