电子商务平台滥用相对优势地位行为的违法性辨析

Analysis of the Illegality of E-Commerce Platforms'Abuse of Superior Bargaining Position

电子商务平台在互联网经济时代尤为重要,已经成为网络交易中的主要市场主体。但是由于电子商务平台市场力量过于强大,导致其与平台内经营者之间的力量过于悬殊,进而引发二者之间的谈判地位失衡。《中华人民共和国电子商务法》第三十五条作为规制这一问题的法律条款在其中发挥着重要的引领作用。该法律条款从滥用相对优势地位的角度出发,规定电子商务平台不得进行不合理限制、附加不合理条件或者收取不合理费用。但是对于如何理解“不合理”却始终没有释明,导致该条款在司法实践和行政执法活动中无法得到有效适用。本文结合电子商务平台的发展特性以及特有的市场结构,从继续性合同角度出发,探讨电子商务平台与平台内经营者之间的非对称依赖关系,在继续性合同和非对称依赖关系的基础上对电子商务平台与平台内经营者之间契约的不完全性展开分析,并结合二者之间交易关系的特殊性,从再交涉义务以及专用资产损害性两个方面对何为“不合理”进行解读。

In recent years,e-commerce platforms have assumed a pivotal role in the Internet economy,emerging as a popular transaction method.However,owing to the substantial market influence wielded by these platforms,the balance of negotiation power between them and platform operators has progressively eroded.Article 35 of China's E-Commerce Law serves as a pivotal clause addressing this legal concern and playing a leading role.This legal provision outlines three obligations for e-commerce platforms:refraining from imposing unreasonable restrictions,imposing additional unreasonable conditions,and charging unreasonable fees to operators on the platforms.However,the interpretation of the term“unreasonable”within this legal provision remains ambiguous,leading to challenges in its effective application in practice.This paper employs the method of law and economics analysis,combining the distinctive developmental features of e-commerce platforms with the unique market structure of e-commerce.It delves into the illegality associated with the abuse of e-commerce platforms'superior bargaining position.The study reveals that Article 35 of China's E-Commerce Law serves as a regulatory provision designed to recalibrate the legal dynamics between e-commerce platforms and platform operators.To comprehensively analyze and discern the concept of“unreasonable”within the legal framework,it is imperative to initially scrutinize the legal ties binding e-commerce platforms and operators on these platforms.By considering the nature of the contractual relationship between e-commerce platforms and platform operators,it becomes evident that a continuous contractual relationship exists between the two.The long-term contract,triggered by the continuous contractual relationship,serves as a significant source of dependency.Furthermore,it is recognized that the contractual relationship between e-commerce platforms and operators within the platform constitutes an incomplete contract.Within this framework,the yardstick for assessing the reasonableness of transactional conditions between the e-commerce platform and the platform operators rests upon asset specificity.Building upon this foundation,this article offers an interpretation of the term“unreasonable”as presented in Article 35 of China's E-Commerce Law from the perspective of renegotiation obligation and damage to asset specificity.The interpretation of the term“unreasonable”,as outlined in Article 35 of China's E-Commerce Law,helps address the imbalance in interest distribution between e-commerce platforms and platform operators,as well as the resulting legal issues that arise from the abuse of bargaining position.A reasonable definition of rights and obligations between e-commerce platforms and operators on platforms can grant e-commerce platforms the freedom to operate,safeguard the interests of small and medium-sized operators on platforms from infringements,and eliminate structural differences between the two.This,in turn,contributes to achieving substantial fairness in the realm of exchange.