Shaping Competition in the Digital Age (SCiDA)

In this episode, Anush and Jasper sit down with Dr Andrew McLean, Lecturer in Law and Political Economy at Edinburgh Law School and director of the Edinburgh Competition Law and Economics Network. He was also awarded the Best Junior paper at ASCOLA 2020 for his paper titled, "A Financial Capitalism Perspective on Start-up Acquisitions."Andrew's forthcoming book "Antitrust and the Age of Asset Management" is due out from Harvard University Press later this year, and his article "Innovation against Change" in the Journal of Antitrust Enforcement has drawn attention for identifying a "rhetoric of innovation" that functions as a modern defence of monopoly power. The conversation covers Andrew's 'economic goodwill test' for start-up acquisitions and whether it captures the wave of AI acqui-hires reshaping the tech sector, his concept of 'techno-conservatism' as the intellectual successor to the Chicago School, the role of Hirschman's "Rhetoric of Reaction" in understanding how innovation arguments influence courts and regulators.We also discuss the case for structural remedies in digital markets in light of the AT&T breakup and ongoing proceedings against Google, and what it means for competition law to engage with the qualitative direction of innovation rather than just its quantity. Andrew also previews his new work on venture capital through a competition lens.

Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng speak with Dr Zihao Li (University of Glasgow) and Dr Jiahong Chen (University of Sheffield) about their recent paper (with Weiwei Yi) challenging the dominant regulatory approach to AI hallucination. Rather than treating hallucination as a simple failure of factual accuracy, Zihao and Jiahong develop a layered taxonomy that includes sycophancy, consensus illusion, oversimplification, and prompt-sensitivity effects, and argue that hyper-optimising for accuracy may paradoxically deepen the very harms regulators seek to prevent. The conversation examines the EU AI Act, the GDPR, and the DSA before turning to a substantial comparative discussion of China's generative AI regulatory framework, including the Interim Measures for Generative AI Services and earlier rules on deep synthesis and algorithmic recommendation. The episode explores where the European and Chinese approaches converge around accuracy as a regulatory anchor and where they part ways in terms of institutional design and content governance. The discussion closes with Zihao and Jiahong's proposals for moving beyond accuracy toward epistemic trustworthiness, and whether pluralism, confidence calibration, and reflective design can gain traction amid growing pressures around AI competitiveness.Here is a link to their paper published with Computer Law and Security Review- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212473X26000520

Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng speak with Jan Blockx, Assistant Professor at the University of Antwerp and member of the Belgian Competition Authority's decision-making body, about the Digital Markets Act and its enforcement record. Drawing on Jan's research in JECLAP and his recent working paper on meta-regulation, the conversation explores whether the DMA has delivered on its promise to address platform power more effectively than traditional antitrust tools, how gatekeepers are navigating the procedural compliance apparatus, and whether the structural tension between regulatory objectives and platform incentives undermines the entire meta-regulatory approach. The discussion also covers the interaction between DMA obligations and Article 102 TFEU enforcement, the case for decentralised enforcement through national competition authorities, and whether the Commission's Digital Omnibus proposals represent meaningful simplification or a retreat from regulatory ambition.Lastly, Jan also discusses the need for EU tech sovereignty on the back of a recent conference he co-organised at the University of Antwerp.

Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng speak with Binit Agrawal, a lawyer and entrepreneur building an AI-first legal practice for emerging cities in India. Binit previously headed strategy at Lucio, a legal AI company, and is empanelled with the UNDP as an expert on AI and law. The conversation covers Binit's trajectory from competition law practice at Axiom 5 Law Chambers to legal technology entrepreneurship, his co-authored critique in World Competition of India's Digital Competition Bill 2024 and the case for phased implementation over wholesale adoption, the practical challenges of deploying AI into legal workflows, and what an "AI-first" practice actually looks like on the ground in India's emerging cities. Binit shares industry perspectives on how foundation models acquire and lock in data, whether existing regulatory frameworks like the DMA and DMCCA can address AI market dynamics, and what India's "frugal AI" model, showcased at the India AI Impact Summit in February 2026, might mean for developing economies. A must-listen for anyone following the intersection of competition law, legal technology, and AI governance.

Anush Ganesh and Jasper van den Boom speak with Simon de Ridder and Maximilian Wolters, doctoral researchers from Humboldt University Berlin, about some of the most pressing questions in German and EU competition law. The conversation covers Simon's proposal for a fine-free enforcement track in EU proceedings, Maximilian's comparative research on market investigation tools in the UK and Germany, and the Bundeskartellamt's landmark 2026 prohibition decision against Amazon under Section 19a GWB, which saw the first use of Germany's reformed disgorgement mechanism. The episode closes with a tribute to the late Professor Heike Schweitzer, whose scholarship on Article 102 TFEU and digital markets regulation continues to shape the field. A must-listen for anyone following the interplay between national enforcement, the DMA, and the future of digital competition policy.

How should the law respond when digital news aggregators hold overwhelming bargaining power over the press publishers whose content they rely on? In this episode, we speak with Dr Małgorzata (Gosia) Kozak from the Institute of Law Studies at the Polish Academy of Sciences, who brings over fifteen years of competition law practice together with deep academic expertise in EU law and digital markets regulation.Drawing on her recent co-authored paper in the International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (IIC), Gosia walks us through why existing tools, from Article 15 of the CDSM Directive to abuse of dominance proceedings under Article 102 TFEU, have struggled to secure fair remuneration for press publishers. We discuss the cautionary tales of earlier German and Spanish legislative attempts, Google's response to the French Autorité de la Concurrence's intervention, and whether Australia's News Media Bargaining Code offers a workable template for Europe. The conversation also explores Gosia's recent work with Anna Gerbrandy on media pluralism as a competition law relevant harm, and closes by looking ahead to the challenges posed by AI-driven news summaries and tools like Google's AI Overviews.A must-listen for anyone interested in the intersection of copyright, competition law, platform regulation, and democratic discourse.

In this episode, Kena Zheng and Jasper van den Boom welcome SCiDA colleague Anush Ganesh as a guest on the podcast. Just over a year since the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act came into force, the UK's new digital markets regime is rapidly taking shape, and Anush has been following its implementation closely, attending CMA roundtables, analysing stakeholder consultation responses, and writing extensively on the emerging regulatory landscape.Together, they discuss the CMA's first proposed conduct requirements targeting Google Search, including interventions on publisher protections against AI content exploitation, fair ranking obligations, innovative choice screen designs with a novel "test-drive" functionality, and data portability. They also examine the CMA's decision to pursue voluntary commitments from Apple and Google on their mobile platforms rather than binding conduct requirements, and what that signals about the regulator's approach. The conversation turns to the bigger picture: how the UK's tailored, evidence-based model compares with the EU's Digital Markets Act, whether the pace of regulation can keep up with fast-moving digital markets, and what the next twelve months will tell us about which approach delivers real results.

In this episode, Anush Ganesh is joined by two doctoral researchers from the European University Institute: Selcukhan Unekbas and Pankhudi Khandelwal, both working under the supervision of Professor Nicolas Petit.Selcukhan's research examines how competitiveness, innovation, and capabilities should reshape European merger law. He discusses his empirical work on killer acquisitions, which found limited support for the theory that large tech companies acquire rivals to eliminate them, and explains the Dynamic Competition Initiative's proposal for a "Dynamically As-Efficient Competitor" test that would protect entrants capable of matching incumbent efficiency in the future rather than requiring them to demonstrate current efficiency. Pankhudi's research explores how interoperability frameworks from the financial sector can inform digital markets regulation. She explains why the DMA's compliance model gives gatekeepers too much discretion and what lessons the Commission could learn from India's Unified Payments Interface. The episode also covers Pankhudi's work with Professor Petit on judicial approaches to duties to deal under Article 102, examining how courts have navigated the tension between the strict Bronner test and the need to address platform abusesThe conversation turns to the Commission's landmark Google Adtech decision ( SCiDA blog for reference - Google AdTech Decision: The Commission’s Landmark Self-Preferencing Case and the Path to Structural Remedies), which found that Google's vertically integrated advertising technology stack created inherent conflicts of interest. Selcukhan and Pankhudi offer complementary perspectives on whether behavioural remedies can work and what structural or technical solutions might address Google's conflicts.

In this episode, Anush and Kena speak with Dr Konstantina Bania, Partner at Geradin Partners and Senior Lecturer at Brunel University London, about the evolving landscape of EU digital platform regulation. Konstantina brings a unique perspective as both a leading practitioner advising clients across the digital economy and an academic whose work on the Digital Markets Act has shaped understanding of this landmark legislation.We discuss whether the DMA has delivered on its promise to be more effective than traditional competition enforcement, drawing on Konstantina's direct involvement in proceedings concerning Apple's designation. The conversation then turns to the Commission's consultations on extending the DMA to cloud infrastructure and AI foundation models, exploring whether a framework designed for consumer-facing platforms can adapt to these new technological contexts.We also examine tensions between the DMA and other EU instruments, including the GDPR and consumer protection rules, revisiting arguments from Konstantina's influential 2022 article on the "myth of the without prejudice clause." The episode concludes with a discussion of escalating transatlantic friction over the DMA and DSA, following Konstantina's Concurrences award-nominated response to the US House Judiciary Committee's characterisation of EU digital regulation as protectionist.

In this episode, Anush and Kena welcome Dr Zlatina Georgieva from Utrecht University to discuss her recent research on EU competition law. We explore her work with Malgorzata Kozak on why escaping liability under Article 102 remains as elusive as finding a unicorn, how the Intel case changed the evidentiary landscape for dominant undertakings, and why the European Commission's proposed break-up of Google's AdTech business may not go far enough. Zlatina introduces 'marketised monetisation,' a novel remedy devised with Todd Davies that would let consumers choose which advertising network monetises their use of Google's platforms. We also preview her forthcoming work on aligning defences under Article 102 and the Digital Markets Act.

In this episode, Anush and Kena are joined by Friso Bostoen, Assistant Professor of Competition Law and Digital Regulation at Tilburg University, to explore the competition policy challenges posed by AI agents. The conversation examines whether the EU's Digital Markets Act is equipped to handle autonomous AI systems that can book flights, make purchases, and interact with businesses on our behalf. Friso shares his analysis of how existing gatekeeper obligations apply to this emerging technology, the regulatory gaps that remain, and why today's tech giants may be best positioned to dominate the AI agent market. The discussion also turns to Friso's recent work on putting a price on AI training data, exploring what lessons competition law can draw from frameworks governing standard essential patents, collecting societies, and platform publisher negotiations.

In this episode, Anush and Kena sit down with Dr Behrang Kianzad, founder of FIDMA and senior researcher at Malmö University, to explore why fairness is re-emerging as a central concept in antitrust after decades of efficiency-dominated thinking.Behrang takes us through his 'Neo-Kantian' approach to competition law, the behavioural economics evidence showing humans are hardwired for fairness, and what the Digital Markets Act's emphasis on 'unfairness' means for enforcement. We also discuss COVID-19 price gouging, the Meta/Facebook case, and whether traditional fairness concepts can apply to AI-driven algorithmic pricing.A must-listen for anyone interested in the philosophical foundations of competition policy and where digital markets regulation is heading.

In this episode, Anush and Jasper are joined by Dr. Alissa Cooper, Executive Director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, to discuss KGI's recent submissions to competition authorities on both sides of the Atlantic regarding Google's search monopoly. The conversation begins with the CMA's provisional designation of Google under the UK's new Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. Alissa explains why KGI supports the designation but criticizes the intervention roadmap for prioritizing ineffective measures like choice screens and data portability over more impactful remedies such as restricting default payments and requiring data sharing. The discussion then shifts to Judge Mehta's remedies decision in the US Google search case, where Alissa unpacks the concerning contradictions in allowing default payments to continue despite the liability opinion's thorough documentation of their anticompetitive harm. She examines the risks of courts over-relying on limited empirical evidence, and why expectations of hypothetical future AI competition are insufficient to address Google's present monopoly. Drawing on her unique background spanning Internet standards, policy advocacy, and industry leadership, Alissa offers cross-jurisdictional lessons on designing effective interventions in complex technology markets and identifies fundamental principles that competition authorities are missing in their approaches to digital platform regulation.

Anush and Kena are joined by Dr. Deni Mantzari, Associate Professor in Competition Law and Policy at UCL and co-Director of the Centre for Law, Economics and Society, for a compelling conversation about fair pricing in digital platform ecosystems. We explore her groundbreaking research on FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory) pricing for app store access under the EU's Digital Markets Act. Deni challenges traditional pricing models and proposes a principles-based framework that recognizes how value is jointly created in digital ecosystems, arguing that platforms shouldn't be compensated for 'network-effect rents' that arise from ecosystem lock-in rather than genuine innovation.We discuss why the European Commission has focused on promoting contestability rather than tackling pricing fairness directly, how digital platforms differ fundamentally from traditional utilities like telecoms, and what institutional challenges arise in measuring reciprocal benefits between platforms and developers. Deni also shares insights from her recent Research Handbook on Data, Privacy and Competition Law, exploring the disciplinary tensions between economists, computer scientists, and legal scholars in digital market regulation. Essential listening for anyone interested in competition law, platform governance, and the future of digital regulation.

In this episode, Anush and Kena sit down with Dr. Viktorija Morozovaite, Postdoctoral Researcher in EU Competition Law and Digital Regulation at Utrecht University, to explore three cutting-edge themes at the intersection of competition law, technology, and democracy.Viktorija unpacks the concept of hypernudging: the sophisticated behavioural manipulation tactics employed by digital platforms that go far beyond traditional nudging. We examine why these practices raise specific concerns under Article 102 TFEU and how they fundamentally challenge conventional competition law frameworks.We delve into her groundbreaking work on discursive power, exploring how Big Tech companies wield influence over public discourse in ways that differ fundamentally from traditional media. Viktorija introduces an analytical framework distinguishing between 'power behind discourse' (structural control) and 'power in discourse' (content and access), and makes a compelling case for why competition law should engage with these democracy-protecting concerns alongside newer regulations like the Digital Services Act.Finally, we discuss the European tech scaleup gap and Europe's strategic dependencies on US and Chinese digital infrastructures. Viktorija explains how cooperative innovation could help European firms scale up, and examines how competition law and the Digital Markets Act interact with these efforts.

Join Anush and Kena as they welcome Dr Magali Eben from the University of Glasgow School of Law for a discussion on digital platform regulation. The conversation begins with press publisher rights in the digital age, examining whether digital markets legislation can effectively address the challenges facing publishers or if more comprehensive interventions are needed beyond competition policy frameworks.The discussion then explores the UK's CMA's growth agenda and provides a comparative analysis of the DMCCA and DMA, examining their key differences in approach. Magali offers insights into how the UK's distinctive regulatory path compares with the EU's framework and what these divergent approaches mean for competition law enforcement in digital markets.The episode concludes with insights into Magali's influential research on market definition for online services that has shaped regulatory debates in digital markets, drawing on her expertise as Subject Lead for the International Competition Law and Policy LLM at Glasgow and Vice-President of ASCOLA.

Join hosts Anush and Kena as they speak with Dr Sangyun Lee, Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Kyoto University, about South Korea's evolving approach to digital platform regulation.Sangyun traces his journey from Korea University through multiple Korean regulatory agencies to his currentresearch position, exploring why economic dependence on platform giants has shaped Korea's cautious regulatory stance. The conversation examines the Korea Fair Trade Commission's (KFTC) proposed shift from DMA-style ex-ante rulestoward a flexible, rebuttable presumptions framework and whether this "middle path" represents pragmatic adaptation or regulatory hesitation.The discussion covers Korea's ‘enlightening the ignorant’ strategy of expert-led policymaking, the wholesale adoption of the EU's Platforms-to-Business Regulation, and the controversial Korea Communications Commission app market legislation. Sangyun offers critical insights into whether Korea's platform market genuinely lacks the evidence for strongerintervention, and what lessons Korea's experience holds for other jurisdictions navigating platform regulation

In this episode, Anush and Kena are joined by Madhavi Singh, Deputy Director of the Thurman Arnold Project and Resident Fellow at Yale Law School, as they explore the collision between Artificial Intelligence (AI) and competition law. This episode examines the Stargate Project (a $500 billion joint venture between OpenAI, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, and Arm) and asks whether such massive-scale AI partnerships raise unique competition concerns for regulators.The discussion ranges from Google's evolving role in search markets (has it "broken its original bargain" by shifting from indexing to AI model training?) to the practical challenges of transatlantic regulatory divergence. Madhavi draws on her research to contrast the EU's early-mover approach to platform regulation with the US approach, examining whether the DMA's swift action on AI Overviews offers a template for addressing publisher concerns, or whether both jurisdictions risk stifling innovation at a critical moment in AI development.Whether you're tracking how competition authorities assess AI investments, curious about the evidence on AI features affecting publisher traffic, or interested in why the same regulatory questions produce different answers across the Atlantic, this conversation offers grounded analysis on where antitrust law meets the digital age.

In this episode, Anush and Kena were joined by Professor Shilpi Bhattacharya, Professor of Competition Law at O.P. Jindal Global University, India, and a leading scholar at the intersection of competition law, behavioral economics, and digital markets. With a PhD from Erasmus University Rotterdam and extensive practice experience, she brings a uniquely global perspective to understanding India's rapidly evolving digital economy and has become one of the foremost voices on Indian competition law.The conversation explores India's emergence as a fascinating laboratory for digital competition issues, from WhatsApp's privacy policy controversies to e-commerce platform regulations. Shilpi shares insights on the Draft Digital Competition Bill, platform market regulation, and how India as one of the world's fastest-growing digital markets is shaping its competition law framework for the digital age, including key lessons that compare approaches in the EU and U.S.

In this episode, Anush and Kena dive deep into Jasper van den Boom's groundbreaking new book "Regulating Competition in the Digital Network Industry" (Cambridge University Press, December 2025). Jasper introduces us to "progressive ecosystem regulation"—a bold new framework that challenges how we think about competition in digital markets.Moving beyond traditional market-by-market approaches, Jasper argues that Big Tech firms don't just dominate individual platforms—they act as de facto regulators of entire segments of the digital network industry through their ecosystems. His solution? A three-tier regulatory system that creates different obligations for entrants, mature ecosystems, and incumbent giants, with a radical twist: offering heavily regulated firms a "way out" if they divest parts of their ecosystems.We explore the distinction between "good" and "bad" ecosystem competition, discuss why early DMA experiences suggest we may need a fundamental paradigm shift, and examine whether current regulatory tools can truly check the power of Big Tech—or if we need to rethink digital regulation from the ground up. Join us for a conversation that bridges law, economics, and management studies to tackle one of the most pressing policy challenges of our time.Link to the book- https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/regulating-competition-in-the-digital-network-industry/0E8D7AB947EBF0209BA264AC051D38F6

In this episode, Anush and Kena are joined by Jasper van den Boom, Assistant Professor of EU Competition Law at Leiden University's Europa Institute and Associate of the SCiDA project, for an in-depth conversation exploring the cutting edge of digital market regulation. The three engage in a lively debate about what the designation process entails across the EU, UK, and Germany, examining best practices and critical timing challenges in digital market enforcement. They also tackle bigger questions: Is digital market regulation going too far, or is it not doing enough? How is the regulatory landscape affecting the investment climate in the EU and UK?In this first part of their two-part series on the SCiDA podcast, Jasper explains how his research on business ecosystems has shaped regulatory thinking and explores the pathways from academic research to real-world policy implementation. Part two will dive into Jasper's book "Regulating Competition in the Digital Network Industry," published by Cambridge University Press. Whether you're a competition law practitioner, policy maker, or simply interested in how digital markets are being reshaped, this conversation offers essential insights into the future of digital competition regulation.

Former Google software engineer turned competition law scholar Todd Davies joins Anush and Kena to explore the legal battleground where AI meets antitrust. Drawing on six years inside Big Tech and his PhD research at UCL, Todd examines whether integrating generative AI into dominant platforms like WhatsApp and Google Search violates competition law through tying and self-preferencing. He unpacks the "foreclosure by enclosure" problem where publicly accessible knowledge gets locked inside proprietary AI systems and argues that tech giants had alternative design choices that wouldn't raise red flags. From Stack Overflow's existential crisis to Google's AI Overviews replacing website clicks, Todd makes the case for swift regulatory intervention before these integrations become irreversible. A must-listen for anyone wondering whether competition authorities can keep pace with AI innovation.See his paper on the topic here- https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5375544

In this episode, Anush and Kena sit down with Dr. Christian Bergqvist, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen and Senior Fellow at the GW Competition and Innovation Lab, to discuss his groundbreaking research mapping over 100 antitrust cases against Google across 23 jurisdictions. Christian unpacks the dramatic shift in regulatory sentiment toward Big Tech, revealing how Google transformed from universally loved to broadly loathed by governments within just a few years. We explore the patterns behind these cases, 86% fall into just eight categories, with Google Search, Android, and AdTech at the center of the storm.Christian brings his unique perspective as both a former Tier 1 competition lawyer and academic researcher to examine which cases pose existential threats to Google's business model, from potential AdTech breakups to the Helena World Chronicle scraping case that could derail Google's AI ambitions. Join us for a masterclass in digital market regulation and a preview of what the next five years hold for Big Tech.

In this episode, Anush and Kena are joined by Dr Thibault Schrepel, Associate Professor of Law at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and Faculty Affiliate at Stanford's CodeX Center. Thibault brings a unique perspective to digital market regulation through his groundbreaking work in computational antitrust and complexity science. He's the founder of the 'Computational Antitrust' project uniting over 75 antitrust agencies globally, and author of the world's most downloaded antitrust articles in recent years, including 'The Blockchain Antitrust Paradox' and 'Complexity-Minded Antitrust.' His recent books 'Blockchain + Antitrust', “Artificial Intelligence and Competition Policy”, and awards highlight his position at the forefront of digital market regulation theory. What makes Thibault particularly valuable for today's discussion is his complexity science approach to understanding digital markets - viewing them not as static systems but as dynamic, evolving ecosystems that may require equally adaptive regulatory approaches.

Hosted by Dr. Anush Ganesh, this episode features SCiDA co-chairs Professor Rupprecht Podszun (Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf) and Professor Oles Andriychuk (University of Exeter), along with Dr. Kena Zheng (Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf), discussing their response to the DMA review consultation.In this episode, the team examines the first two years of DMA practice and explores critical gaps in enforcement, particularly around AI and cloud services. They discuss why major players like Nvidia, OpenAI, AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud haven't been designated despite meeting quantitative criteria, and propose AI services as a new core platform service category.The conversation delves into Google's controversial European Search Dataset Licensing Program and the underutilization of Article 6(11) data access provisions. The guests debate the DMA's "iterative journey" approach to compliance versus achieving immediate contestability, and examine the tension between stakeholder-driven enforcement and regulatory dialogue with gatekeepers.The SCiDA team engaged in extensive internal debate on several aspects discussed in this episode, particularly around compliance philosophy and enforcement approaches, reflecting the complexity of regulating digital markets effectively.Time stamps00:00-07:30 - Introduction to SCiDA and the DMA consultation 202507:30-24:00- Effectiveness of the DMA + Inclusion of AI services24:00-29:30- Data access and Article 6(11) DMA29:30-40:00- Compliance and Regulatory Dialogue40:00-43:30- Decentralized approach43:30-53:44- Final comments and way forward