Two weeks ago, I was in Seoul to engage with Korean academics and policymakers on the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Korea’s own initiatives to regulate digital ecosystems. Beyond the warm welcome and the vibrant energy of Seoul, I was struck by two prevalent myths about the DMA.
The first myth is that the DMA is anti-innovation, and that the Draghi “Competitiveness Bible” criticised it. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Draghi said that “Open access and interoperability are pro-competitive forces, as is the adoption of common technological standards. Important advances in promoting open access and interoperability in digital markets have been achieved through the DMA.” The DMA is designed to promote innovation by opening up today’s dominant digital ecosystems to new entrants and innovators.
The second myth — propagated in part by the Trump Administration — is that the DMA is protectionist and anti-American. Again, this is a misunderstanding. The DMA promotes innovation regardless of origin — be it American, Asian, African, or European. As the Draghi Report also highlights, many of today’s digital innovators happen to be American. Unsurprisingly, the DMA’s main beneficiaries so far have been US companies such as Epic Games, DuckDuckGo, Brave, Meta and Microsoft.
Of course, no law is perfect, which is why the upcoming DMA review will be essential to address its inevitable shortcomings – and our upcoming work on the DMA will consider how to evaluate the success of the Act (please contact us if you would like to be involved). Similarly, no enforcement is flawless, and the Commission should remain guided by an innovation-oriented approach in applying the DMA. As recent reports from our DMA Implementation Forum show, implementing the DMA has involved challenges. But as I described in a recent interview with Korean newspapers, what I call the “Anti-Matrix Law” is fundamentally pro-competition and pro-innovation.
Subscribe to CERRE’s newsletter here.
