European Commission Launches E-commerce Sector Inquiry
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.07.15
On May 6, 2015, the European Commission announced the launch of an inquiry into the e-commerce sector that will seek to identify potential antitrust concerns in European e-commerce markets.
Scope of the Sector Inquiry
The Commission believes there are indications that private undertakings are deliberately erecting barriers—particularly contractual barriers—to cross border e-commerce, e.g., restrictions imposed by suppliers in distribution agreements. The aim of the inquiry will be to determine whether such barriers exist and whether they raise antitrust concerns. The focus will be on goods and services subject to widespread e-commerce, such as electronics, clothing, shoes and online content.
The inquiry is intended to be complementary to the Commission's Digital Single Market strategy, also adopted on May 6, which focuses on removing legislative and regulatory barriers to cross-border e-commerce.
It will sit alongside various existing Commission investigations of restrictions in licensing agreements between major U.S. film studios and European broadcasters, restrictions on online pricing and sales of electronic products, and restrictions on cross-border access to online video games.
Next Steps
In the coming weeks, the Commission will send information requests (RFIs) to industry participants and other stakeholders throughout the EU. Addressees will include owners of content rights, broadcasters, online retailers, and suppliers of goods and services sold online.
In the course of the inquiry, the Commission may issue further requests for documents and data from companies, and in previous sector inquiries it has even carried out dawn raids.
A preliminary report on the findings of the inquiry is expected to be published for consultation mid-2016, giving interested parties the opportunity to comment. Publication of the final report is expected in the first quarter of 2017.
Why Does This Matter?
The European Commission has previously conducted sector inquiries in the energy, food, and pharmaceuticals sectors. Experience has shown that inquiries can have a major impact on the sector under investigation.
In this case, knowledge gained may lead to legislative initiatives to boost cross-border e-commerce. Responses to RFIs and responses to the consultation will help to shape that debate.
Moreover, previous sector inquiries have triggered formal antitrust infringement investigations of individual companies.The Commission has confirmed that if it comes across anti-competitive barriers to the development of online cross border sales, it will not hesitate to take enforcement action. RFI responses will therefore need to be carefully crafted—and now may be a good time to review existing online distribution contracts and sales practices affecting the EU.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
