Describing India's new competition law on big tech
Asia Internet Coalition, an industry body representing companies such as Google, Twitter, and Meta criticized and termed the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance's recommendation to introduce a digital competition law and its overall on Big Tech firms' anti-competitive practices as 'absolutist' and 'regressive'. The Asia Internet Coalition (AIC) was established in 2010 as an industry association that promotes the understanding and resolution of Internet policy issues in the Asia Pacific region.
Recently the AIC said, "The AIC is concerned that the digital competition law recommended by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance may dampen digital innovation in India."
It recommended the government conduct wide consultations with stakeholders to "new legislative proposals meet international best practices, are evidence-based, and are for the purpose of benefiting innovation, growth, and consumers".
The AIC's members include Amazon, Meta, Google, Twitter, Meta, LinkedIn, and so on…
On December 23, the committee recommended that India should enhance its competition law to address the unique needs of the digital market. The committee suggested that a digital markets unit be established within the commission, with experts who could monitor systematically important digital intermediaries (SIDIs) and emerging SIDIs and also offer suggestions to the Centre.
The recommends defining Big Tech companies as Systemically Important Digital Intermediaries (SIDIs) on the basis of their revenues, market capitalisation, and end users.
The Indian government has recently proposed two significant bills -- the revised Digital Personal Data Protection Bill and the Competition Amendment Bill (CAB), both of which seek to protect consumers, preserve competition and promote tech innovation, with a special focus on digital markets. "Otherwise, transplanting legislative reforms designed for a foreign jurisdiction with high digital penetration into India, could lead to disproportionate costs to consumers in India and an impact on innovation and investment by businesses in India -- especially at a time when the government is rightly focusing on bringing connectivity to all under the Digital India initiative."
Last month, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance recommended that the Centre should formulate a digital competition act to regulate anti-competitive practices by Big Tech companies.
The Coalition put forward by the Committee is "prescriptive, absolutist and regressive in nature". The Coalition said that it is critical to first understand the "effects of these two bills on the digital ecosystem before introducing any new legislative proposals". The purpose of the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill Act is to provide for the processing of digital personal data in a manner that recognizes both the right of individuals to protect their personal data and the need to process personal data for lawful purposes and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
The Competition Amendment Bill expands the powers of the Director General for investigating contraventions under the Act. This includes the power to seek information and documents from legal advisers also. This may be at variance with the provisions of lawyer-client confidentiality under section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, of 1872.
The Asia Internet Coalition(AIC) :
Industry body Asia Internet Coalition (AIC) has come out all guns blazing against the recently tabled report on anti-competitive practices by big tech companies. In a statement, AIC said the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance was prescriptive, absolutist, and regressive in nature. The industry body also said that the digital competition law recommended by the panel could dampen digital innovation in the country.
The coalition also said that incorporating legislation from foreign jurisdictions into India could impact innovations and investments flowing into the country.
“Transplanting legislative reforms designed for a foreign jurisdiction with high digital penetration into India, could lead to disproportionate costs to consumers in India and an impact on innovation and investment by businesses in India…,” said the AIC in a statement.
The industry body also called on the center to conduct wider stakeholder consultations before formulating new laws governing the space. AIC also hinted that introducing any new digital competition legislation could lead to over-compliance, adding that the introduced Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022, and the Competition Amendment Bill, 2022 also proposed to govern the digital markets.
Flagging incorporation of elements of the European Union’s Digital Markets Act and US’ American Innovation and Choice Online Act, AIC called for exercising restraint citing the ‘long transition and implementation periods’ of the two norms.
The world needs coordinated digital rules :
More importantly, the formulation of global cooperation rules and the transformation of global digital governance should not be decided by individual countries. When countries jointly build a peaceful and open cyberspace, they should adhere to certain principles. The most important one is to respect the cyber sovereignty of all countries. No country should rely on its technological advantages to seek digital hegemony, interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, or engage in, condone or support its companies in cyber activities that endanger the national security of other countries.
For the future development of the digital economy, China, India and other developing countries should advocate digital multilateralism. All parties should adhere to the principles of negotiation, not confrontation, inclusiveness not exclusiveness, and jointly expand common interests and explore the potential and vitality of digital economic cooperation.
