The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has released its seventh report of the Digital Platform Services Inquiry and has invited submission from interested stakeholders by 5 April 2023. The information sought by the ACCC revolves around the activities of digital platform service providers use of strategies like bundling to limit competition and create technological lock-in. Information is also sought about the extent of penetration into the smart home devices, cloud storage sectors by Digital Platforms.
What is a digital platform ecosystem?
The ACCC defines digital platform ecosystem to mean:
“the wide range of interrelated products and services – whether interrelated through technical interoperability or by commercial practices such as bundling – offered by a single or related group of companies.”
What is the significance of digital platform services?
The ACCC acknowledges how some of the top digital service providers in the world such as Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Apple, Meta (Facebook) and Microsoft are expanding the possible services that they may make available. This includes developing products in areas like AI, VR, virtual assistants, education, health, fitness, media streaming, home connected devices, gaming, clouds, and financial technology. The ACCC’s focus for submissions from stakeholders is on smart home devices and cloud storage.
The reason for seeking submission is to explore relationships between interconnected digital service platforms and any potential competition or consumer law issues that may arise.
What is the purpose of the inquiry?
The ACCC is aiming to investigate how expansive digital ecosystems may be potentially harmful to competition, consumerism, and business in general. The issued report acknowledges that whilst platform expansion can encourage competition, these global large providers can inhibit competitors from participating in the market and may limit the opportunity to create a competitive market. The inquiry aims to understand what specific consumer risks there are and their potential impact.
Some issues raised by ACCC include:
- Risk of dark patterns – when user interfaces (UIs) are made to confuse users and make it difficult to express their preferences.
- Certain ecosystems may limit choice for consumers (for example the fact that a consumer owns a Samsung phone limits them from buying an Apple Watch if they wish since the Apple Watch is only compatible with the iPhone).
You can find further information on the Digital Platform Services Inquiry and how to make a submission here: Digital platform services inquiry 2020-25. The ACCC encourages stakeholders to make submissions by 5 April 2023.
Links and further references
Digital platform services inquiry 2020-25
Further information about online business
If your business needs advice on compliance with any aspect of online business, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Disclaimer
This article contains general commentary only. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
Related insights about online business
-
Electronic document execution by directors
The Federal Government has issued a ruling allowing companies to sign documents electronically until 6 November 2020. Find out more about how this ruling affects your business.
-
Assigning intellectual property and the right to sue
This case examines Re Taypar Pty Ltd v Benko Santic [1989] FCA 543, which determined that an assignee of intellectual property rights cannot sue for pre-assignment infringements, unless the assignment explicitly assigns a right to do so.
-
Evidence from the Wayback Machine accepted
Australian Courts are increasingly considering the use of evidence from the Wayback Machine, but questions remain as to whether they will accept such reports in practice and what will be allowed?
-
$750k awarded for fake online reviews
The Supreme Court of South Australia awarded $A750,000 in damages to a lawyer in the case of Cheng v Lok [2020] SASC 14, demonstrating the serious consequences of posting fake reviews online. Find out more about the implications of this case and alternative legal actions for companies that receive negative reviews.
-
Adaptations and computer code – copyright issues
An adaption in copyright is the exclusive right of the owner of the work in question. Section 10 of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Act) defines adaption as it relates to literary works in dramatic and non-dramatic forms, in a computer program and in relation to a musical work. The rights that apply to adaptions…
-
Australian court orders Google to unmask reviewer
The case of Kabbabe v Google LLC [2020] FCA 126 has major implications for businesses and online reviewers alike. Learn more about the Court’s decision and what it means for anonymous online reviews by reading the full article.
-
Computer code libraries and copyright ownership
The Australian case of Redrock Holdings Pty Ltd and Hotline Communications Ltd v Hinkley [2001] VSC 91 has shed light on how the ownership of copyright in code libraries is determined. Learn more about the dispute and its implications for copyright ownership in this blog post.
-
e-Signatures – legally binding on companies?
E-signatures are becoming increasingly popular, but are they legally binding? Find out in this article, which examines the Adelaide Bank case and reveals the limitations of e-signatures when it comes to executing a deed. Click through to learn more.
-
New safety standards proposed for online platforms
The Australian Government has proposed an Online Safety Act that could significantly change the way businesses manage user-generated content online. Find out how this proposed Act could affect your business and how you can prepare for it.
