| Treating platforms as a fixed business model makes it difficult to form a joint force in academic research, and also delays the upcoming platform regulation. Platforms have evolved from information-storage intermediaries in Web 1.0 to information-exchange intermediaries in Web 2.0, and to business-aggregation intermediaries in Internet Ecosystem. Such an evolution not only changes the definition of platforms, but also causes expansions and variations of monopoly conduct, i.e. the expansions of relevant markets within Web 2.0 and Internet Ecosystem, and the variations of the relations between platforms and non-competitors and between platforms and business operators. While the traditional anti-monopoly mechanism still maintains its effectiveness in regulating inter-platform monopoly conduct when integrating an evolutional view on platform models, it reaches its limit in coping with the variations of relations between platforms and business operators, namely the abuse by platforms of their organizing function to strengthen the profit-running function. To bridge the gaps in the anti-monopoly mechanism, it is necessary to adopt categorical regulation based on two platform types, namely to guide and monitor the making of intra-platform rules by big platforms, prohibit super platforms from applying self-preference, and shift the burden of proof to super platforms in cases of predatory acquisitions. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号