*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. 1. The game and the law. Law is not a game. Described as a "serious subject" by Dean Carbonnier [1], law is most often seen as an austere and obscure discipline, reserved for a few initiates capable of deciphering its language and penetrating its mysteries. This language, commonly referred to as "legal", requires precision in the terms chosen and used by the legislator. It frequently leads to the use of a so-called "technical" language accessible only to a small cohort of jurists [2] trained mainly on the benches of law schools and whose noble mission consists not only in understanding, but also in interpreting a law "colonized by technique" [3]. Thus, the
Share on
|
|
ARTICLES: COMPETITION LAW - ECONOMIC REGULATION - DIGITAL MARKETS
Will digital regulation law marginalize competition law? Reflections in the light of Epic Games v. Apple
Is competition law the appropriate instrument for disciplining big digital companies? Shouldn’t we admit its limitations in apprehending certain deviant behaviors recently detected on many digital markets? The development of digital regulation law suggests that competition law cannot do everything on its own. Therefore, in the future, it could well be totally marginalized by this new branch of law. This is the thesis that this study proposes to examine in the light of the Epic Games v. Apple case.
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.
