With the rapid development of the Internet industry，The bet365 withdrawal economy has become a pillar force in my country’s economic development。According to statistics，The bet365 withdrawal economy has accounted for nearly 40% of my country’s GDP in 2020。To give full play to the innovative aspects of the bet365 withdrawal economy，my country has long adopted an “inclusive and prudent” regulatory attitude toward platforms。But the bet365 withdrawal economy is in full swing、While developing further，Gradually showing the aspect of the barbaric growth of capital。Facing this new phenomenon，The central government made a decisive decision at the end of 2020 to “strengthen anti-monopoly and prevent disorderly expansion of capital”，Intended to continue the leap-forward development of the bet365 withdrawal economy while effectively controlling its negative effects。

To this day，bet365 withdrawal antitrust has been implemented for more than a year。According to the official website of the State Administration for Market Regulation (hereinafter referred to as the “General Administration”)，During the period from December 2020 to December 2021，The General Administration has enforced laws against bet365 withdrawal companies a total of 72 times，Including three cases of abuse of market dominance、One case of banning concentration of business operators、68 cases of penalties for failing to declare centralized declarations，The cumulative fine amount exceeds 21.7 billion yuan。Among them，The most important ones are the two cases of abuse of market dominance - the "Alibaba case" (Alibaba was fined 182.2.8 billion yuan) and the "Meituan case" (Meituan was fined 34.4.2 billion yuan)。These two cases are representative cases of the General Administration as the bet365 withdrawal antitrust enforcer，The high fine has brought a warning effect to the entire Internet industry，The importance of the Anti-Monopoly Law in regulating orderly competition on platforms has also been widely publicized，Made an indelible contribution to the smooth development of bet365 withdrawal antitrust work in the future。But bet365 withdrawal anti-monopoly is not a campaign-based law enforcement intended by the central government，It is a major strategy related to the future development of the entire Internet industry。Therefore，Where bet365 withdrawal antitrust will eventually go requires us to keep thinking。

The phased change in the attitude towards law enforcement by bet365 withdrawal companies is not a unique phenomenon in my country。Look at the world，There are similar changes in bet365 withdrawal regulations in Europe and the United States。There are two stages of changes in my country's bet365 withdrawal companies from "tolerance and prudence" to "strengthening anti-monopoly"。The development of Europe and the United States has shown three stages of changes。In general，Before 2017, Europe and the United States also adopted a laissez-faire development approach similar to my country’s “inclusive and prudent” approach to platforms；During 2017-2020，Europe and the United States have also observed the trend of disorderly expansion of bet365 withdrawal capital，Began to regulate bet365 withdrawal companies by strengthening antitrust law enforcement。Google、Amazon、Apple、Facebook and other platforms have been subject to antitrust investigations；Among them，Google has been punished more than 10 times in EU countries，Cumulative fines exceed 10 billion euros。Starting from the end of 2020，Europe and the United States have entered the third stage of bet365 withdrawal regulation，That is, formulating special industry regulation legislation for the bet365 withdrawal economy。The European Commission proposed the “Digital Market Act” legislative draft in December 2020。The draft was approved by the European Parliament in December 2021 with 642 votes、8 votes against、46 abstentions resulted in a unanimous vote。In the United States, the House of Representatives proposed five legislative drafts including the "Ending bet365 withdrawal Monopoly Act" in June 2021，Currently in the legislative process。

Although my country has made administrative penalty decisions on three platforms for abusing their market dominance in the past year’s bet365 withdrawal antitrust enforcement work，But these three cases all involve the same behavior，That is, the bet365 withdrawal’s “choose one” behavior。Compare to，The bet365 withdrawal monopoly behaviors punished by Europe and the United States are other than "choose one"，Also includes bundles、Most Favored Nation Clause、Self-preferential treatment、Internet Blocking、Data abuse, etc.。The strange thing is，The two seem to have started the third stage of bet365 withdrawal regulation almost simultaneously, as if there was a prior agreement。

The European Commission gave a detailed explanation of this change in the legislative explanation of the "Digital Market Act"。The European Commission spoke highly of past bet365 withdrawal antitrust work，believes that antitrust law enforcement plays a vital role in regulating the competitive order of the Internet industry。But then the European Commission pointed out，“Although EU competition law can solve some problems in the Internet field，But it cannot effectively solve all the problems caused by the bet365 withdrawal，In particular, many problems are not directly related to the abuse of market position”。The main reason for these problems is that bet365 withdrawal companies "have dual roles on specific occasions，On the one hand, as a provider of core bet365 withdrawal services to provide services to merchants，On the other hand, they compete as competitors with merchants that provide the same or similar services”；and，The bet365 withdrawal may use big data analysis in the process of exercising dual roles、Ranking、Exclusion and restriction of competition among competitors within the bet365 withdrawal through self-preferential treatment。For this，The EU draft sets special obligations for bet365 withdrawal companies，Including not competing with merchants based on data collected from merchants、Do not give preferential treatment to your own or affiliated companies’ products or services in ranking products or services、Technical means shall not be used to restrict users from switching to other applications within the bet365 withdrawal、Allow merchants to access or provide compatible information to access the operating system or other functions of the bet365 withdrawal。

The legislative culture of the United States is different from that of the European Union。The U.S. House of Representatives did not specifically explain the legislative background in its legislative draft，It is simply stated in the first article of these drafts that the purpose of the legislation is to “eliminate conflicts of interest arising from a dominant bet365 withdrawal simultaneously owning or controlling other platforms or Internet businesses”。The US draft proposes that the obligations that platforms should bear include: structural split、Not allowed to be merged with other platforms、No self-preferential treatment、Allow third-party competitors to access our own systems, etc.。Judging from the setting of these obligations，The US draft should also pay attention to the limitations of the application of antitrust laws in the bet365 withdrawal field，Especially the inability to address the bet365 withdrawal’s self-preferential behavior as both a referee and an athlete。

The repositioning of the role of the bet365 withdrawal market in Europe and the United States is worthy of our repeated consideration。Whether it is the previous “tolerance and prudence” or the current “strengthened antitrust”，Our country regards platforms as general operators。But in addition to providing intermediary services for information matching，Also undertakes a large number of market management functions。For example，For enterprise qualification certification，Our country allows online operators to use the online business premises provided by the bet365 withdrawal to apply for industrial and commercial registration。Another example，The bet365 withdrawal can exempt itself from joint and several liability by initiating the notification removal process。Zairu，Our country even gives platforms the right to build dispute resolution mechanisms，And encourage platforms to establish rules for consumer deposits and advance compensation through various forms。The implementation of these mechanisms makes the bet365 withdrawal surpass ordinary operators，And has the market management function of the government or social intermediary organization。But while the bet365 withdrawal is responsible for market management functions，Engaging in for-profit business activities again。In the execution of this dual role，The bet365 withdrawal has a close cooperative relationship with the merchants it manages，There is tense competition again。Due to the existence of this conflict of interest，The bet365 withdrawal may use its own market management functions to benefit itself、Profit-making behavior that is not conducive to businesses。

The antitrust practices of my country, Europe and the United States have shown that，Antitrust law is of great significance to regulating orderly competition on platforms。But the antitrust law directly regulates competition between platforms，That is, the bet365 withdrawal’s behavior of excluding and restricting competition against platforms operating the same business。By prohibiting these actions，Antitrust law can indirectly protect the rights and interests of merchants and users。But when it comes to the relationship between a pure bet365 withdrawal and merchants，The bet365 withdrawal may implement behaviors that infringe on the interests of merchants based on its market management capabilities。At this time，First of all, there is no strict competition between the bet365 withdrawal and the merchants，The reason why the Second Lai bet365 withdrawal infringes on the interests of merchants is not necessarily because it has monopoly power，Therefore, antitrust laws are often powerless against these behaviors。For example，What is currently more controversial is the bet365 withdrawal’s self-preferential behavior，That is, the bet365 withdrawal gives preferential treatment to itself or its affiliated companies，Suppress merchants that have nothing to do with you。This is specifically reflected in the bet365 withdrawal’s behavior of placing its own products on the homepage or in the top search rankings。However, the differential treatment in traditional antitrust laws can only prohibit the discriminatory behavior of monopoly entities against third-party enterprises that are not affiliated with them，It is therefore difficult to deal with the self-preferential behavior described above。

my country’s bet365 withdrawal companies not only bear the responsibility of deepening the further development of Internet business，Also bears the important task of improving my country’s foreign trade in the context of Sino-US trade friction，It also shoulders the ardent expectations of realizing the central government’s 14th Five-Year Plan and the long-term goals for 2035。We must clearly realize that bet365 withdrawal antitrust is not a suppression of bet365 withdrawal companies，Not even a denial of the bet365 withdrawal economy，But to control the negative effects in the development process of bet365 withdrawal economy，Eliminate the worries of Internet platforms and related companies，Make it better、Faster、Higher utilization of the innovation potential of the Internet industry。Therefore，bet365 withdrawal antitrust must be continued to be implemented in depth as a policy guide。But at the same time, we must also realize that antitrust is the main focus of current bet365 withdrawal regulation，has its advantages and limitations。In future law enforcement work，We must not only give full play to the role of antitrust law in promoting the order of bet365 withdrawal economic competition，We must also recognize the dual role of platforms as market competitors and market managers，It is more necessary to consider the disorderly expansion of capital caused by the bet365 withdrawal taking on dual roles。Only if this is properly resolved，Only in order to finally achieve common prosperity。

　　(The author is a professor at Kaiyuan bet365 withdrawal School of Shanghai Jiao Tong University)