歲月的容顏 YingChu Chen

When the US Department of Justice announced that Google Search Engine violated the Sherman Act, the message made me think of the US lawsuit against Microsoft regarding the Internet Explorer case . It was a long process, and I just remembered the case result. How many people still remember the case and the result? Then, I read some articles that support Google's perspective. Google said the company doesn't sell or charge for the search engine service, so the US DOJ's market definition and relevant market are improper. Enforcing antitrust laws in the digital age is a complex task. The authorities are aware that some traditional antitrust tools are no longer sufficient. They need innovative solutions to tackle the unique challenges posed by digital issues. While some concepts remain the same, old-school theories and toolkits need to be updated to effectively regulate the digital market. While Google may not charge for its search engine services, it does profit from ranking sea...

DALL·E - A vibrant, detailed scene capturing the essence of technology monopolies, represented by towering skyscrapers with logos of major tech companies. Twenty years ago, I was a student in a 5-year college. My major was international trade. The world was wild for globalization, and the internet was beginning. We studied international trade rules in the commercial college, L/C, insurance of the cargo (on board or before on board, or other conditions), the difference between container terminals and freight stations, etc. Some rules are still workable in e-commerce. E-commerce or online shopping is still working on the basics of international trade. As a student, I learned what we should pay attention to when a company wants to set up a branch company or expand its subsidiary in another country; the company needs to follow the local law and customs and respect the local culture, especially when a company needs to have advertisement or marketing events to promote their products. Also, t...

這一週是 聯合國電子商務週 的會議，主題是Data and Digitalization for Development。時間是4月25日至29日，這次是混合型會議，實際地點在日內瓦聯合國總部。但就算是線上會議，在亞太地區的時區（台灣是 UTC+8）也是下午四點開始到晚上十二點，要跟會議其實是蠻累的。也不建議再回頭看錄影，因為會浪費更多時間，加上聯合國電子商務週的討論很多都是高度理想化的。 外交基金會（Diplo Foundation）每天會替大家整理相關的重點，可以參考他們的 頁面 ，也提醒大家可以參考： Promotion of trustworthy data spaces and digital self-determination 。就不需要那麼累去跟會議。不過昨天有一場討論是關於「資料自決權」（Data self-determination），這在台灣比較少被討論，多數的討論會停留在「資料主權」（Data Sovereignty）和「資料在地化」（Data Localization）。 不討論「資料自決權」的原因很多，企業不會希望政府做出規定，政府可能也擔心如果人民討論起資料自決權，在法治教育不是那麼足夠的社會，會在行政上出現很多麻煩。歐盟的資料保護法GDPR，大多數人會想到GDPR第17條的被遺忘權，但其實很少人再進一步想關於資料自決權。 國際網路競爭網絡（International Competition Network ，ICN）和英國競爭和市場管理局（CMA）都有發現這點，網路企業會因為網路效應、規模經濟，用一些手段提高消費者的轉換成本、學習成本，讓消費者必須被綁在自己的服務平台上，例如，穿戴式裝置，各位手上的智慧手錶。Fitbit 的使用者如果想要更換其他品牌的智慧手錶，可否把資料從 Fitbit攜出，和 Garmin 或是 Huawei、Samsung、Apple watch 上使用？很難，非常難用。這樣的議題大家可能會想到歐盟最近通過的數位市場法（Digital Market Act，簡稱 DMA）、數位服務法（Digital Service Act，簡稱 DSA）主要還是限制平台的行為、資料的使用，若是關於資料的治理政策還要自歐盟要達成的目標、還有其資料治理相關的法規，如歐洲議會在今年4月所通過的 Data Governance Act ...