"Talk About European Color Change"? Victory And Anxiety In The Main Battlefield

Looking at the European Union's anti-monopoly law over the past few years, the EU's strong attack in the field of anti-monopoly has set an example. What worries us is whether some of the disposal methods will make the later "talk about European color change".

In the past two months, the EU's anti trust climax has been going round and round. Whether it is punitive sanctions or for local protectionism considerations, the EU's high fines "big brush" has made many companies around the world tongue tied, and at the same time, let the global economic community focus on Qi Qiju. The EU has become the main battleground of anti-monopoly.

Even in the main battleground of the European Union's anti monopoly law, even the US multinational giants are not immune, and if they are against it, they are also fined heavily.

As a result, every move against the EU's anti monopoly is so exciting that every EU regulation and action is enough to create a whirlwind.

For the European Union, as long as it is beneficial to itself, no matter "new hatred and old hatred" should be estimated.

9 years ago, the famous IT giant Microsoft Corp was accused of using its absolute advantage in the personal computer operating system market to occupy the server software market. Its performance was that Microsoft Corp refused to provide relevant technical information to competitors in the server industry, resulting in the competition for the software developed by hand could not be fully compatible with the Microsoft windows (Windows) operating system.

In March 24, 2004, Microsoft was sentenced to a huge fine of 497 million euros. Microsoft paid a fine in July of that year. In July 12, 2006, the EU decided to impose a total fine of 280 million euros on Microsoft Corp.

Although the market of Microsoft's "window" products after the "cut" was reflected in plain and heavy losses, Microsoft paid a heavy price to protest. However, Microsoft, who was eager to see it, came to the preliminary judgement in September 17th this year: to maintain the original judgment.

On that day, Microsoft shares fell sharply.

Under the trend of global economic take-off, the European Union has been punishable with frequent punches in the field of anti monopoly. It has constantly refreshed the penalty record: in 2001, 8 vitamin manufacturers participating in illegal cartels were fined 885 million euros. In February this year, 5 large elevator companies, which formed illegal cartels, were fined 992 million euros.

As a game maker, the European Union has the power to kill and kill.

The European Union, which is not short of money, has benefited from each decision, "its actions are for the sake of greater interests."

Also in September of this year, after another wave of anti-dumping, the owner of a famous shoe manufacturer in Quanzhou, China, once said so.

His words reflect the aspirations of everyone after the EU suffered setbacks in the market economy.

Although the EU can not be worried about the penalty, the fact is that it has not been stopped by the exultation. Instead, a series of old fist continues to be played: on October, 1, the European Commission announced an anti monopoly investigation into the act of "abuse of patent rights" by the Qualcomm Corp, the second largest mobile phone chip manufacturer in the world. On the 3 day, the European Union issued a statement that it had launched an in-depth antitrust investigation on the paction of the acquisition of IBM by the international business machines company (IBM), and imposed a fine of 10 million 200 thousand euro on the same day to punish the global credit card giant for refusing to accept Morgan Stanley as its member.

In fact, the EU's stick sanctions have safeguarded the economic interests of Member States.

"The EU's move is economically to protect the interests of European software development companies, and to" give blood to Europe's software companies "through punitive measures against Microsoft; and more importantly, from the perspective of information security, worrying that computer operating systems are pinched in the hands of a foreign enterprise will constitute some invisible potential threat.

Wang Zhongmei, an associate research fellow at the Institute of world economics of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, analyzed the Microsoft incident. "But is there any suspicion of abuse of power in the EU's practice?"

It is reported that most countries now encourage technological innovation, and enterprises can be exempt from the anti-monopoly law if they acquire market advantage or even monopoly status through their own R & D or joint research and development of new technologies.

However, if an enterprise abuses its dominant position and impedes fair competition, the government has the right to supervise it based on the antimonopoly law.

However, how should we judge whether an enterprise is protecting or abusing technological advantages? Is the government lawful or abused?

The strict degree of the EU's anti-monopoly system is commendable, but the problem is that the basis and scale of the anti-monopoly law in economics and law are relatively vague. If abused, it will bring bad effects to the economy.

In fact, when the US Department of justice made a lawsuit against Microsoft, hundreds of economists jointly wrote letters of protest to Congress, saying that the government had abused the anti-monopoly law.

The industry is worried that after Microsoft and other famous enterprises, enterprises will continue to be subjected to the EU's anti-monopoly penalties.

In these fined companies, some of them are famous for their US capital. Will the EU become the nightmare of more US funded enterprises after becoming the main battleground of anti-monopoly?

Will this increase the difference between the EU and the US due to economic law enforcement differences?

Looking at the European Union's anti-monopoly law over the past few years, the EU's strong attack in the field of anti-monopoly has set an example. What worries us is whether some of the disposal methods will make the later "talk about European color change".