Regulation of Dominant E-Commerce Platform: Lessons from the United States and Japan
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
A comparative study on antitrust enforcement between the United States and Japan finds that the objective of U.S. antitrust law is focusing on “efficiency” and “consumer welfare.” In the era of the digital economy, this emphasis has hindered U.S. enforcement agencies from effectively regulating monopolistic behavior by powerful platform-based electronic companies. That’s because consumers often benefit from such monopolies—even when other stakeholders, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), are being disadvantaged. In contrast, Japan’s antimonopoly law is designed to uphold and preserve “free and fair competition,” which includes protecting SMEs from being exploited or harmed by unfair trade practices employed by large corporations. Thailand’s competition law shares the similar objective with Japan’s, including provisions against unfair trade practices. Based on the above comparison, this author proposes that Thailand’s enforcement agency should introduce secondary regulations to specifically govern the behavior of dominant e‑commerce platform currently operating in Thailand.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The copyright in this website and the material on this website (including without limitation the text, computer code, artwork, photographs, images, music, audio material, video material and audio-visual material on this website) is owned by Chulalongkorn University Law Journal and its licensors.
1. Chulalongkorn University Law Journal grants to you a worldwide non-exclusive royalty-free revocable license to:
- view this website and the material on this website on a computer or mobile device via a web browser;
- copy and store this website and the material on this website in your web browser cache memory; and
- print pages from this website for your use.
- All articles published by Chulalongkorn University Law Journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. This permits anyone to copy, redistribute, remix, transmit and adapt the work provided the original work and source is appropriately cited.
2. Chulalongkorn University Law Journal does not grant you any other rights in relation to this website or the material on this website. In other words, all other rights are reserved. For the avoidance of doubt, you must not adapt, edit, change, transform, publish, republish, distribute, redistribute, broadcast, rebroadcast or show or play in public this website or the material on this website (in any form or media) without appropriately and conspicuously citing the original work and source or Chulalongkorn University Law Journal prior written permission.
3. You may request permission to use the copyright materials on this website by writing to journal@law.chula.ac.th.
4. Chulalongkorn University Law Journal takes the protection of its copyright very seriously. If Chulalongkorn University Law Journal discovers that you have used its copyright materials in contravention of the license above, Chulalongkorn University Law Journal may bring legal proceedings against you seeking monetary damages and an injunction to stop you using those materials. You could also be ordered to pay legal costs.
If you become aware of any use of Chulalongkorn University Law Journal's copyright materials that contravenes or may contravene the license above or any material on the website that you believe infringes your or any other person's copyright, please report this by email to journal@law.chula.ac.th.
References
หนังสือภาษาไทย
กัญจน์ศักดิ์ เพชรานนท์. วิวัฒนาการกฎหมายต่อต้านทรัสต์ของสหรัฐอเมริกา. โครงการส่งเสริมการผลิตผลงานวิชาการ คณะนิติศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย. กรุงเทพฯ: วิญญูชน, 2565.
ปวงชน อุนจะนำ. เศรษฐกิจการเมือง: ความมั่งคั่ง อำนาจ และชนชั้น. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์แห่งจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, 2567.
ปิติ ศรีแสงนาม. ไทยในระเบียบโลกใหม่. กรุงเทพฯ: มติชน, 2565.
ปิยะบุตร บุญอร่ามเรือง. กฎหมายและนโยบายแพลตฟอร์ม. โครงการส่งเสริมการผลิตผลงานวิชาการ คณะนิติศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์แห่งจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, 2567.
ศักดา ธนิตกุล. คำอธิบายและกรณีศึกษาพระราชบัญญัติการแข่งขันทางการค้า พ.ศ. 2542. กรุงเทพฯ: วิญญูชน, 2553.
Jacob Goldstein. ประวัติศาสตร์ว่าด้วยเรื่องเงิน (Money). แปลโดย อาริตา พงศ์ธรานนท์. กรุงเทพฯ: แอร์โรว์ มัลติมีเดีย, 2567.
หนังสือภาษาต่างประเทศ
Bade, Robin, and Michael Parkin. Essential Foundations of Economics. 7th ed. London: Pearson, 2015.
Braden, Donna R. The Henry Ford: Official Guidebook. New York: Beckon Books, 2017.
Brue, Stanley L., and Randy R. Grant. The Evolution of Economic Thought. 8th ed. South Western: Cengage Learning, 2007.
DK. Timelines of Science. New York: Penguin Random House, 2023.
Dunne, Jemima, et al., eds. Books That Changed History: From The Art of War to Anne Frank’s Diary. London: Dorling Kindersley, 2017.
Greenspan, Alan, and Adrian Wooldridge. Capitalism in America: A History. Manhattan: Penguin Press, 2018.
Hovenkamp, Herbert. Federal Antitrust Policy: The Law of Competition and Its Practice. 2nd ed. Minnesota: West Academic, 1999.
Kanai Takaji, Eguchi Kiminori and others. Keizaihou Gaisetsu: 経済法概説 (Explanation on Economic Law). Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 1999.
Kennen, Peter B., ed. Managing the World Economy: Fifty Years after the Bretton Woods. Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics, 1994.
Kenwood, A. G., and A. L. Lougheed. The Growth of the International Economy 1820–1980. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1983.
Klobuchar, Amy. Antitrust: Taking on Monopoly Power from the Gilded Age to the Digital Era. New York: Knopf, 2022.
Mankiw, N. Gregory. Principles of Microeconomics. 6th ed. South Western: Cengage Learning, 2011.
Matsushita Mitsuo. Keizaihou Gaisetsu: 経済法概説 (Explanation on Economic Law). 3rd ed. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press, 2004.
Moore, Martin, and Damian Tambini, eds. Regulating Big Tech. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022.
Nobora Kawahama and others, eds. 独禁法審決/判例百選 (The 100 Selected Decisions and Judgements on Antimonopoly Law), The Jurist No. 268. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 2024.
Roffer, Michael H. The Law Book: From Hammurabi to the International Criminal Court, 250 Milestones in the History of Law. New York: Sterling, 2015.
Suzuki Masuhiro and others. TXT 経済法 (TEXT KEIZAIHOU). Kyoto: Horitsu Bunkasha, 2016.
Takashi Kanai and others, eds. 独禁法審決/判例百選 (The 100 Selected Decisions and Judgements on Antimonopoly Law), The Jurist No. 237. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 2017.
Tamura Shigekazu and Atsuya Jouji. 独禁法審決/判例百選 (The 100 Selected Decisions and Judgements on Antimonopoly Law), The Jurist No. 141. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 1997.
Tucker, Irvin B. Economics for Today. 11th ed. South Western: Cengage Learning, 2023.
Yamada, Atsushi. Abuse of Superior Bargaining Position in Japan—Its Development and Current Position. CPI Columns: Asia, December 2022.
บทความในวารสารภาษาต่างประเทศ
Salop, Steven C. Dominant Digital Platforms: Is Antitrust Up to the Task?. Yale Law Journal Forum 130 (January 2021): 563–587.
รายงานการประชุมภาษาต่างประเทศ
Task Force for Abuse of Superior Bargaining Position, International Competition Network. Report on Abuse of Superior Bargaining Position. ICN Seventh Annual Conference, Kyoto, Japan, April 14–16, 2008.
กฎหมายภาษาไทย
มาตรา 56 แห่งพระราชบัญญัติการแข่งขันทางการค้า พุทธศักราช 2560
กฎหมายภาษาต่างประเทศ
Ohio v. American Express Co., 138 S.Ct. 2274 (2018).
Ohio v. American Express Co., 138 S.ct. 2274 (2018).
Ohio v. American Express Co., 138 S.ct. 2274 (2018) (Justice Breyer, Dissenting Opinion at p. 2294).
Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 38–40 (1911).
Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 40 (1911).
Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 41–42 (1911).
Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 42–43 (1911).
Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 43 (1911).
United States v. American Tel and Tel Co., 552 F. Supp. 131 (DDC 1983).
United States v. American Tel and Tel Co., 552 F. Supp. 141 (DDC 1983).
United States v. Microsoft Corporation, 253 F.3d 34, 59–60 and 64 (DC Cir. 2001).
United States v. Microsoft Corporation, 253 F.3d 45 and 48 (DC Cir. 2001).
United States v. Microsoft Corporation, 253 F.3d 59–60 (DC Cir. 2001).
JFTC v. Noda Company, ศาลสูงเมืองโตเกียว, 25 ธันวาคม ค.ศ. 1957.
Tokyo High Court Decision, 25 December 1954, Kosaminshu, Vol. 10, No. 12 (1957).
JFTC v. East NTT, Supreme Court of Japan, 17 December 2010 (Heisei 22).
Federal Trade Commission (FTC), For Release, FTC Sues Amazon for Illegally Maintaining Monopoly Power, September 26, 2023.
JFTC, Approval of the Commitment Plan Submitted by Amazon Japan, September 10, 2020.
JFTC, The JFTC has filed a petition for an urgent injunction against Rakuten Inc., Feb 28, 2020.
ออนไลน์ภาษาไทย
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการการแข่งขันทางการค้า. Zoom คดีแข่งขันทางการค้า ฉบับที่ 1: กรณีห้ามขายสินค้าของคู่แข่งในตลาดเครื่องดื่มชูกำลัง. สืบค้นเมื่อ 25 มิถุนายน 2568. https://www.tcct.or.th/assets/portals/1/files/ZOOM_EP_1.pdf
ออนไลน์ภาษาต่างประเทศ
Van de Walle, Simon. What Has the JFTC Accomplished in Digital Cases Using the Antimonopoly Act?. Accessed June 25, 2025. https://www.simonvandewalle.eu/JFTC_enforcement_digital.pdf
