Regulating Gaming Sector Competition

Extract

[...] Thus, the hindrance to innovation and the diversity of the offer constitutes one of the most insidious effects of anti-competitive practices in the gaming sector. It calls for a more transparent, more open, and above all, oriented towards an economy of diversity, the only guarantee of a truly competitive and protective market. § 2. The competitive consequences for operators and consumers Anti-competitive practices directly affect the balance of the gaming market, both in the relationships between operators and in the relationship with consumers, particularly through the eviction strategies deployed by certain dominant actorsA), and the devices aimed at protecting the rights and interests of consumers The strategies and practices of exclusion of dominant operators In an economically sensitive market like the gaming industry, the existence of historically consolidated dominant positions by legal monopolies raises obvious risks of exclusion practices, aiming to block or limit the entry and development of competing operators. [...]

[...] Another revealing indicator of the existence of a cartel in the gaming sector is the artificial division of markets. It may involve implicit agreements between operators aiming to share geographic segments or product categories to avoid direct confrontation. Such a strategy was evident in the dispute between the European Commission and several Italian gaming companies, where the limitation of access to licenses constituted an entry barrier orchestrated by the historical actors in the sector. The CJEU case law has also established that a cartel does not necessarily require an explicit agreement between its members. [...]

[...] The distribution of competences between national and European authorities The regulation of gambling involves a plurality of actors whose articulation conditions the effectiveness of competition law. The distribution of competences between national and European levels and the internal relations between authorities and jurisdictions become conditions of this effectiveness. The coordination of the actions of regulators The regulation of the gaming sector, in particular in the face of anti-competitive practices, relies on a configuration of competences between national authorities and European institutions. [...]

[...] Secondly, it will be a matter of analyzing how these structured agreements profoundly alter the market and distort the game of competition (§2). § 1. The judicial expansion of the concept of cartel in gaming The concept of cartel, in competition law, does not only refer to explicit agreements between companies. It also encompasses coordinated practices, sometimes informal, with the objective or effect of restricting the normal play of competition. In the gaming sector, this definition must be approached in an expanded manner, in order to grasp the collusive mechanisms hidden behind apparently autonomous behaviors. [...]

[...] It constitutes a fundamental complement to competition law, adapted to the social specificities of the sector.77 § 2. The fight against organized crime and money laundering: legal issues and international cooperation The gaming sector, due to the fluidity of financial flows and the increasing digitalization of operations, remains exposed to forms of organized crime, particularly in the area of money laundering don't the transnational cooperation mechanisms try to mobilize for the counter A. The vulnerability of the gaming sector to criminal risks and money laundering The gaming sector, combining rapid financial flows, massive digitization, and potential anonymity, presents a structural vulnerability to criminal practices, particularly money laundering. [...]