Second Stage in Facebook File

September 2019 Mert Karamustafaoğlu

“The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.”

A. Einstein

% 0

Introduction

The popular TV series, Dark, begins with an Einstein phrase: “The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.” (Der Unterschied zwischen Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft ist nur eine Illusion, wenn auch hartnäckige).

Recent developments within the scope of the Facebook file are also a revolution in terms of competition law and data protection law. The debates on today"s agenda will determine the changing content of the future digital economy, big data, and competition law.

With the decision of the Federal German Cartel Office (“Cartel Office") dated 6.2.2019, Facebook"s data collection activities were thoroughly examined. The Cartel Office found that Facebook dominated the Federal German market in terms of social media platforms, and detected that it abused its dominant position in the scope of data collection activities. Therefore, an issue that could be subject to data protection law has also been considered as a competition law problem. This resulted in a new type of violation in terms of competition law.

The Facebook Decision of the Cartel Office 

In accordance with the general terms and conditions provided by Facebook, users could only benefit from the social networking services provided by the undertaking on the condition that they accept the Facebook data processing policy. In addition to users" data, such as Instagram and WhatsApp, Facebook, as a third party, was processing data from non-Facebook web pages and applications. By combining all of this data, almost a complete Facebook user data system had been created.

The decision of the Cartel Office basically examines whether Facebook"s data collection activities should be considered as a violation of competition or not. For this purpose, it was firstly determined whether Facebook is in a dominant position. In calculating Facebook"s market share, the Cartel Office made a distinction between daily active users and monthly active users. In 2018, Facebook had 1.52 billion daily active users and 2.32 billion monthly active users, worldwide.[1]

The Cartel Office found that Facebook dominates the social network market in Federal Germany. In terms of the German market, Facebook has a market share of approximately 95%, with 23 million daily, and 32 million monthly, users. Competitive social networks, such as Google+, Snapchat, YouTube, Twitter, Xing and LinkedIn have not been seen in the same relevant product market, as they offer services that are limited as compared to Facebook. In addition, the high market shares of applications, such as Instagram and WhatsApp, which are part of the same economic group as Facebook, were also among the factors strengthening Facebook"s dominant position.

Andreas Mundt, Chairman of the Cartel Office, has made a remarkable statement. [2] Andreas Mundt stressed that Facebook, as a dominant undertaking, has a special obligation in terms of competition law, and that it is impossible for Facebook users to switch to other social networks as a practical matter. Mundt said that the fact that users had to allow such intense data collection in order to use Facebook, does not create a reasonable justification considering the market power of the undertaking. This is because users face either allowing this data processing activity, or not being able to benefit from this social network. Therefore, Andreas Mundt stated that there can be no explicit consent given through free will.

As a result, it has been determined by the Cartel Office that Facebook"s data processing activity is abuse of its dominant position and constitutes a violation of competition. Also, Facebook collects user data through other companies in the same group, such as Instagram and WhatsApp, as well as data on other websites and, overall, maintains very detailed user data.

The Cartel Office considers Facebook"s activity of collecting data, especially from third-party internet resources, as an exploitative practice, describing it as an abuse of dominant position[3]. Facebook, as a dominant undertaking, unlike its competitors, extensively collects consumers" data, and this is a violation of competition under Article 19 (1) of the Federal German Competition Act. The Cartel Office referred to the case-law of the Federal Supreme Court of Appeals for the characterization of this behavior as being exploitative.

This is referred to as exploitative behavior if disproportionate contractual obligations are imposed depending on the market power or superiority of one party, as regulated under Article 307 and subsequent Articles of the German Federal Civil Code. Therefore, the Cartel Office underlined that this "unusual" type of competition violation that appeared in the Facebook file was, in fact, a type of well-known exploitative behavior from the standpoint of German law. In addition, it was determined by the Cartel Office that Facebook"s imposing its data processing policy on the basis of market power, constitutes an application of disproportionate conditions against consumers in terms of data protection law.

As a result, the Cartel Office did not impose an administrative fine on Facebook but, instead, requested changes to the data processing activity. Accordingly, Facebook will be able to continue to collect data on channels, such as WhatsApp and Instagram, within the same group. However, in order to transfer the data obtained from these channels to the Facebook accounts of the said users, explicit consent must be obtained; otherwise, this data will not be automatically transferred. In other words, users benefitting from Facebook services, and Facebook"s data collection activities, will be separated from each other. Facebook will be able to process the data of users of other social media platforms in the same group, such as WhatsApp and Instagram, with Facebook data, provided that express consent is obtained.

Transferring and processing of third-party data with Facebook data will only be possible with the express consent of the users, and of their free will. In this context, the Cartel Office also stated that the concept of obtaining the express consent of the users using their free will can be understood as not making use of the Facebook services, conditional on the granting of this consent.[4]. The Cartel Office has allowed a period of 20 months for the necessary changes to be made in the data processing activities. Facebook is also obliged to submit a detailed plan for changes to be made within four months.

The Facebook decision of the Cartel Office is particularly critical in terms of identifying the relevant market, determining market power, and dominant position. Undoubtedly, the most important finding is that it is necessary to distinguish using Facebook services and data collection activities. In other words, it may be possible to use the Facebook service for users who do not accept the processing of such data in such a large and extensive scope.

Instead of a Conclusion, the Decision of the Higher Regional Court

The Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (“OLG"), which has been determined as the competent court for the decisions of the Cartel Office, is making very detailed decisions, which can result in changing case-law, from time to time, in terms of competition law.

While discussing what will change after the Facebook decision of the Cartel Office, and the new limits of competition law, it has decided to suspend execution of the decision of the Cartel Office (“OLG YD Decision”) [5]. This decision, which is approximately 37 pages in length, has added new dimensions to the discussions.

The OLG YD Decision opposes the Cartel Office"s assessment of competition law and the data protection law. The OLG states that even if Facebook"s data processing activities contain legal incompatibilities under the data protection law, there is serious suspicion that this is also a breach of competition. Thus, the OLG has brought serious counter-arguments about the most innovative findings of the Cartel Office. The OLG states that users have no economic losses due to Facebook"s data protection policy. The reason behind this is that users" data is not lost after the transfer to Facebook. Unlike precedents of the Federal Court of Justice referred to in the decision of the Cartel Office as exploitation, it is stated that the data obtained by Facebook is reproducible and consumers are not harmed by this activity.

As a result of the OLG YD Decision, Facebook does not have to implement the decision of the Cartel Office. It will be able to continue its existing data processing activities, at least until the end of the trial. One thing is certain, however: The limits of competition law will drastically change at the end of this judicial process. Even if the OLG cancels the decision of the Cartel Office at the end of this process, Andreas Mundt"s statement[6] that he will ultimately carry the case to the European Court of Justice, shows the determination of the Competition Authority on this matter. Therefore, it is seen that competition law will be a serious obstacle for Facebook and similar enterprises to act “unlimited" in their policies to obtain big data. In other words, the Cartel Office explicitly tells the companies having “big data," such as Facebook, "Die Fette Jahren sind Vorbei,"[7] as exhibited in a Federal German movie.

[1] For the Relevant Press Release, see also; https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/SharedDocs/Meldung/DE/Pressemitteilungen/2019/07_02_2019_Facebook.html?nn=3591568 (Access date: 04.10.2019).

[2] https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/SharedDocs/Meldung/DE/Pressemitteilungen/2019/07_02_2019_Facebook.html?nn=3591568, s. 2 (Access date: 04.10.2019).

[3] For mentioned detections: https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidung/DE/Fallberichte/Missbrauchsaufsicht/2019/B6-22-16.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4, s. 8-10.

[4] For detailed information: https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidung/DE/Fallberichte/Missbrauchsaufsicht/2019/B6-22-16.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4 s. 2 (Access date: 29.09.2019).

[5] For press release, see also; http://www.olg-duesseldorf.nrw.de/behoerde/presse/Presse_aktuell/20190826_PM_Facebook/index.php (Access date: 10.10.2019), For the mentioned court decision, see: http://www.olg-duesseldorf.nrw.de/behoerde/presse/Presse_aktuell/20190826_PM_Facebook/20190826-Beschluss-VI-Kart-1-19-_V_.pdf (Access date: 10.10.2019).

[6] https://www.wiwo.de/politik/deutschland/facebook-verfahren-kartellamtschef-will-bis-in-die-letzte-instanz-gehen/24157606.html (Access date: 10.10.2019).

[7] In a movie from 2004 called "The Edukators," a small group of three people sneak into the homes of wealthy individuals, and pretend as if it is theft, but relocate items without stealing anything in order to draw attention to the inequality of opportunity. They also leave a piece of paper with the words "profitable years are over" to give the hosts a lesson.

All rights of this article are reserved. This article may not be used, reproduced, copied, published, distributed, or otherwise disseminated without quotation or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm's written consent. Any content created without citing the resource or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm’s written consent is regularly tracked, and legal action will be taken in case of violation.

Other Contents

A Recent CAS Decision in the Scope of European Union Competition Law: FIFA vs. Agents
Newsletter Articles
A Recent CAS Decision in the Scope of European Union Competition Law: FIFA vs. Agents

At the meeting of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (“FIFA”) held on 16 December 2022, the FIFA Council approved the FIFA Football Agents Regulations (“FFAR”). In the FFAR, various amendments have been made, such as the introduction of a maximum service fee limit that football agents are...

Competition Law 30.09.2023
CJEU Judgment in Super Bock: New Insight on Resale Price Maintenance
Newsletter Articles
CJEU Judgment in Super Bock: New Insight on Resale Price Maintenance

Resale Price Maintenance (RPM) is still considered a hardcore restriction under the recently revised Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER), which means that it cannot benefit from a statutory exemption under Article 101(1) TFEU, unlike certain other types of vertical agreements. However, it has been debated...

Competition Law 31.07.2023
The Relationship Between Economic Entity and Family Ties in Light of Competition Board Decisions
Newsletter Articles
The Relationship Between Economic Entity and Family Ties in Light of Competition Board Decisions

In competition law, it is important to accurately determine the concept of undertaking, especially in terms of mergers and acquisitions. Therefore, the concept of economic entity aims to reveal the economic units covered by the undertakings. The relationship between the concept of economic entity and family ties comes...

Competition Law 31.07.2023
A New Breath of Fresh Air for Competition Investigations from the Constitutional Court
Newsletter Articles
A New Breath of Fresh Air for Competition Investigations from the Constitutional Court

In these days when the Competition Board (“Board”) frequently imposes administrative fines for preventing on-site inspections and both the Competition Authority (“Authority”) and undertakings take legal and technical measures regarding on-site inspections, a striking development has occurred. In its decision...

Competition Law 30.06.2023
Competition Law Practices in the Online Advertising Market
Newsletter Articles
Competition Law Practices in the Online Advertising Market

Online advertising has become an important source for businesses for promoting products and services and meeting consumers, as a result of the rapid development of information technologies and increase in the use of internet. Delivering targeted messages to consumers at the right time through the digital...

Competition Law 30.06.2023
Selective Distribution Systems
Newsletter Articles
Selective Distribution Systems

Selective distribution systems refer to a type of distribution system in which suppliers commit to selling the contracted goods or services directly or indirectly to distributors selected based on specified criteria, while the distributors commit not to sell the said goods or services to unauthorized...

Competition Law 31.05.2023
Final Sector Inquiry Report of the Competition Authority Regarding Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Retailing
Newsletter Articles
Final Sector Inquiry Report of the Competition Authority Regarding Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Retailing

Fast-moving consumer goods is undoubtedly one of the sectors that the Competition Authority has been working most intensively since the COVID 19 pandemic. Among the most important developments of this period was the Sector Inquiry initiated on Fast Moving Consumer Goods (“FMCG”) Retailing...

Competition Law 30.04.2023
Constitutional Court's Evaluation of the Competition Board's Authority to Conduct On-Site Investigations
Newsletter Articles
Constitutional Court's Evaluation of the Competition Board's Authority to Conduct On-Site Investigations

In the decision of the Constitutional Court ("Constitutional Court" or "Court") dated 09.11.2022, numbered 2020/67 E. 2022/139 K. (the "Decision"), the annulment of certain articles of the Law Amending the Law on the Protection of Competition No. 4054 ("Law No. 7246") was requested...

Competition Law 30.04.2023
Gun Jumping in Turkish Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
Gun Jumping in Turkish Competition Law

In Turkish competition law, certain types of mergers and acquisitions are subject to Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) approval in order to gain legal validity. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”), the Board is competent to define mergers and acquisitions...

Competition Law 31.03.2023
The Problem of Returning the Data Obtained as a Result of Unlawful Notification in Light of the Competition Board Decision
Newsletter Articles
The Problem of Returning the Data Obtained as a Result of Unlawful Notification in Light of the Competition Board Decision

Recently, the Competition Board (the Board) had imposed administrative fines on banks and financial institutions for failing to respond to the request for information within the scope of a preliminary investigation.[i] The request for information that lays the groundwork for the administrative fine imposed by...

Competition Law 28.02.2023
The European Commission Accepts Amazon’s Commitments
Newsletter Articles
The European Commission Accepts Amazon’s Commitments

Amazon, a world-famous company, is an e-commerce company that operates the world’s largest online shopping platform. In the backstage, Amazon is a data-driven company whose retail decisions are mostly driven by automated systems, fueled by the relevant market data. That being said, Amazon has a dual...

Competition Law 31.01.2023
Deletion of WhatsApp Correspondence During On-Site Inspections
Newsletter Articles
Deletion of WhatsApp Correspondence During On-Site Inspections

The right to make on-site inspections is one of the Competition Board’s (“Board”) most important tools for revealing whether Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) has been violated. The effective use of this authority is quite important in terms of obtaining fruitful results from...

Competition Law 31.10.2022
Amendment on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce: “The Fire of Mount Doom”
Newsletter Articles
Amendment on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce: “The Fire of Mount Doom”

“Harese” is an interesting Arabic word. There is a thorn that camels love very much in the desert. The camel eats the thorn with great greed. So much so that, its mouth bleeds as it eats, but it doesn't stop eating. The taste of the thorn is mixed with the salty taste of its own blood. This mixed taste drives the camel...

Competition Law 30.09.2022
Turkish Competition Board Fines Digiturk
Newsletter Articles
Turkish Competition Board Fines Digiturk

Turkey’s leading pay television service provider, Krea İçerik Hizmetleri ve Prodüksiyon A.Ş. (“Digiturk”), is frequently the subject of complaints made to the Competition Authority (“Authority”). In fact, the Competition Board (“Board”) issues a new decision about Digiturk almost every year. In these decisions...

Competition Law 30.09.2022
The French Competition Authority’s Decision on Meta’s Commitments
Newsletter Articles
The French Competition Authority’s Decision on Meta’s Commitments

The French Competition Authority (Autorité de la Concurrence), within the scope of the competition law proceeding initiated upon the complaint of Criteo SA (“Criteo”), accepted the commitments proposed by Meta Platforms Inc., Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd., and Facebook France...

Competition Law 31.07.2022
A Different Approach to Monetary Fines for Hindering On-Site Inspection: The Decision of the Ankara II. Administrative Court
Newsletter Articles
A Different Approach to Monetary Fines for Hindering On-Site Inspection: The Decision of the Ankara II. Administrative Court

While the scope of Competition Board’s (“Board”) power to conduct on-site inspections has increased with the introduction of Guidelines on Examination of Digital Data during On-site Inspections (“Guidelines”), nowadays the amount of monetary fines imposed on undertakings continue to...

Competition Law 31.07.2022
Hub and Spoke Cartel in Comparative Law
Newsletter Articles
Hub and Spoke Cartel in Comparative Law

The hub and spoke cartel, which is a relatively new type of violation in terms of Turkish competition law, is defined as the indirect exchange of information between two independent undertakings which are horizontal competitors on the supplier or retailer level, through another undertaking...

Competition Law April 2022
The First Settlement Case in Turkish Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
The First Settlement Case in Turkish Competition Law

The settlement mechanism has only recently been introduced to Turkish competition law practice. It entered into force with the amendment made to the Law on the Protection of Competition (“Law”) numbered 4054 on 16.06.2020, and has been in effect for less than two years. In this relatively...

Competition Law April 2022
The E-Marketplace Platforms Sector Inquiry Final Report and What It Brings
Newsletter Articles
The E-Marketplace Platforms Sector Inquiry Final Report and What It Brings

Due to their increasing share in the economy and rapid growth rate, e-marketplace platforms have come under the increasing scrutiny of the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) as well as many competition authorities around the world...

Competition Law April 2022
Amendments Introduced to the Communique Concerning the Mergers and Acquisitions Requiring Competition Board’s Approval
Newsletter Articles
Amendments Introduced to the Communique Concerning the Mergers and Acquisitions Requiring Competition Board’s Approval

Pursuant to the Amendment Communiqué Concerning the Mergers and Acquisitions Requiring the Competition Board’s Approval (“Amending Communiqué”) published in the Official Gazette dated March 4th, 2022 and numbered 31768, certain amendments have been introduced...

Competition Law March 2022
A New Glance at Online Sales: The Competition Board’s BSH Decision
Newsletter Articles
A New Glance at Online Sales: The Competition Board’s BSH Decision

The Competition Board (“Board”) has recently published a reasoned decision in which it evaluated BSH Ev Aletleri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.’s (“BSH”) request for negative clearance or exemption with regard to its practice of prohibiting authorized dealers from making sales through online marketplaces...

Competition Law March 2022
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 2: “Shahmaran’s Story”
Newsletter Articles
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 2: “Shahmaran’s Story”

Shahmaran, a Mesopotamian myth, is believed to take place in Tarsus. According to the myth, the shah of snakes is the immortal and omniscient "Shahmaran." Shahmaran is described as a beautiful woman living in her cave with her snakes...

Competition Law February 2022
Online Sales Within The Framework Of Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
The Effects of the Recent Decision by the Turkish Competition Board on Market Chains and Their Suppliers
Newsletter Articles
The Effects of the Recent Decision by the Turkish Competition Board on Market Chains and Their Suppliers

During the COVID-19 pandemic, competitive concerns about the pricing behavior of chain markets, manufacturers, and wholesalers engaged in the retail trade of food and cleaning supplies led to an investigation by...

Competition Law January 2022
On-Site Inspections in Light of the Recent Decisions of the Competition Authority
Newsletter Articles
On-Site Inspections in Light of the Recent Decisions of the Competition Authority

When the past decisions and the recent decisions of the Competition Board (“Board”) are examined, a significant increase can be observed in the number of decisions where the Board found hindrance or obstruction of on-site inspections. This situation shows that...

Competition Law December 2021
The European Commission Fines Banks for Participating in a Forex Cartel
Newsletter Articles
The European Commission Fines Banks for Participating in a Forex Cartel

The European Commission began investigating the collusive behavior of Credit Suisse, UBS, Barclays, RBS, and HSBC in the Foreign Exchange (forex) spot trading market in 2019. With the recent press release dated 02.12.2021, the Commission announced that the case is now closed...

Competition Law December 2021
Hub and Spoke Cartels
Newsletter Articles
Hub and Spoke Cartels
Competition Law November 2021
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 1: “Captain, an object is approaching”
Newsletter Articles
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 1: “Captain, an object is approaching”

Digitalization, in particular, necessitates the rewriting of competition law rules. Competition law is at the center all questions regarding e-commerce and digital platforms. The aforementioned platforms, which have become prominent due to innovations in...

Competition Law November 2021
Coca Cola’s Commitments in the Recent Competition Investigation
Newsletter Articles
Settlement Regulation Enters into Force
Newsletter Articles
Settlement Regulation Enters into Force
Competition Law July 2021
Competition Law Concerns Regarding Human Resources Practices
Newsletter Articles
The New Cartel Decision of the Competition Board
Newsletter Articles
The New Cartel Decision of the Competition Board
Competition Law September 2020
Amendments in the Law on the Protection of Competition
Newsletter Articles
Setting Legal Grounds for On-site Inspections
Newsletter Articles
Evaluation of COVID 19 Outbreak in Terms of Turkish Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
The File of Sahibinden.com; A Phoenix Story
Newsletter Articles
The File of Sahibinden.com; A Phoenix Story
Competition Law February 2020
Final and Interim Decisions of the Turkish Competition Board
Newsletter Articles
European Commission’s Foreign Exchange Spot Trading Cartel Decisions
Newsletter Articles
Expected Second Half of Competition Authority’s 12 Banks Decision
Newsletter Articles
Turkish Competition Board’s Sahibinden.com Decision
Newsletter Articles
Recent Developments in Abuse of Dominance Concerning Online Platforms
Newsletter Articles
New Horizons in Competition Law; Diesel Emissions Scandal
Newsletter Articles
Recent Developments in the Right of Access to Files
Newsletter Articles
Cards are being redistributed in the Turkish Beer Market
Newsletter Articles
The Recent Motor Vehicles Insurance Decision of the Competition Board
Newsletter Articles
Selective Distribution Systems under the Light of Coty Decision
Newsletter Articles
Competition Authority’s Sector Inquiry Report on Television Broadcasting
Newsletter Articles
Excessive Pricing
Newsletter Articles
Excessive Pricing
Competition Law June 2017
Amazon Decision and E-Book Commitments
Newsletter Articles
Amazon Decision and E-Book Commitments
Competition Law June 2017
Umbrella Effect within the Framework of Private Competition Enforcement
Newsletter Articles
Tüpraş Decision and the Rebate Systems
Newsletter Articles
Tüpraş Decision and the Rebate Systems
Competition Law September 2016
Important Reason in Terms Of Share Transfer Restrictions
Newsletter Articles
Booking.com Decision
Newsletter Articles
Booking.com Decision
Competition Law January 2017
Price / Margin Squeeze
Newsletter Articles
Price / Margin Squeeze
Competition Law November 2016
Recent Problems in Electricity Distribution Sector: ELDER Decision
Newsletter Articles
Intellectual Property Rights As Capital in Kind
Newsletter Articles
Right To Request Information Of The Shareholders in Joint Stock Companies
Newsletter Articles
Affected Market
Newsletter Articles
Affected Market
Competition Law August 2015

For creative legal solutions, please contact us.