Understanding Big Tech and Digital Market Power Big Tech companies operate digital platforms that act as intermediaries between users, advertisers, and sellers. What sets them apart from traditional businesses is their reliance on data, algorithms, and network effects. The more users a platform attracts, the more valuable it becomes, making it increasingly difficult for competitors to enter the market. This often results in a “winner-takes-all” situation. Unlike conventional markets, many digital services are offered free of cost. Consumers do not pay in money but in data, which is then monetised through targeted advertising and analytics. As a result, market dominance in digital spaces is not always visible through pricing but through control over data, visibility, and access. This makes assessing anti-competitive behaviour significantly more complex. Competition Law Framework Governing Digital Markets in India India’s competition regime is governed by the Competition Act, 2002, which aims to prevent practices that cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition. Two provisions are particularly relevant for regulating Big Tech companies. Section 4 of the Act prohibits abuse of dominant position. Abuse may include imposing unfair conditions, denying market access to competitors, or leveraging dominance in one market to gain an advantage in another. Section 3 deals with anti-competitive agreements, including arrangements that restrict competition or distort market fairness. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) is entrusted with enforcing these provisions. However, the Act follows a traditional enforcement model that requires defining the “relevant market” and establishing dominance. In digital markets, where services are multi-sided and rapidly evolving, defining market boundaries becomes difficult. Platforms may simultaneously operate across search, advertising, e-commerce, payments, and cloud services, making conventional market definitions inadequate. Judicial and Regulatory Response: CCI’s Engagement with Big Tech In recent years, the CCI has shown increasing willingness to apply competition law to digital platforms. One of the most significant developments was the Google Android case, where the CCI found Google guilty of abusing its dominant position by imposing restrictive conditions on smartphone manufacturers. Mandatory pre-installation of Google applications and restrictions on alternative app stores were held to limit consumer choice and suppress competition. This decision marked a strong assertion of regulatory authority over Big Tech in India. Similarly, the Amazon–Flipkart investigations brought attention to issues of platform neutrality. Allegations of preferential treatment to select sellers, deep discounting practices, and exclusive arrangements raised concerns about unfair competition and exclusion of small traders. While final adjudication is ongoing, these proceedings reflect the CCI’s proactive stance toward digital marketplaces. The WhatsApp privacy policy case further expanded the scope of competition law by examining data-sharing practices between WhatsApp and its parent company, Meta. The case illustrates how dominance in messaging services, combined with data aggregation, can potentially distort competition across multiple digital markets. Key Challenges in Regulating Digital Markets Through Competition Law: Despite these interventions, competition law faces several structural challenges when applied to digital markets. First, enforcement under the Competition Act is largely ex-post, meaning action is taken only after harm has occurred. In fast-moving digital markets, such delays may render remedies ineffective. By the time an order is passed, competitors may already be eliminated. Second, there is a significant information asymmetry between regulators and Big Tech companies. Access to proprietary algorithms, internal data, and platform design decisions is limited, making it difficult to establish abuse conclusively. Third, digital regulation involves overlapping jurisdictions. Issues relating to competition, data protection, consumer protection, and information technology often intersect. The absence of a coordinated regulatory framework may lead to fragmented enforcement and regulatory gaps. Emerging Need for Ex-Ante Digital Regulation Recognising these challenges, regulators worldwide are shifting towards ex-ante regulatory frameworks that impose obligations on dominant digital platforms before competition is harmed. The European Union’s Digital Markets Act is a prominent example, introducing pre-defined obligations for “gatekeeper” platforms. India is also moving in this direction. Policy discussions and expert committee recommendations have highlighted the need for a specialised digital competition framework. The proposed Digital Competition Bill aims to address systemic risks posed by large digital enterprises by focusing on fairness, transparency, and contestability. Such a framework would complement existing competition law by enabling faster intervention, reducing litigation delays, and ensuring a level playing field for smaller businesses and startups. Balancing Regulation and Innovation: While stronger regulation is necessary, it must be carefully balanced to avoid stifling innovation. Big Tech companies play a crucial role in driving technological advancement, digital inclusion, and economic growth. Over-regulation may discourage investment and innovation in the digital sector. Therefore, India’s approach should focus on targeted and proportionate regulation, addressing anti-competitive conduct without imposing unnecessary compliance burdens. Collaboration between competition authorities, data protection regulators, and technology policymakers will be essential in achieving this balance. About Author: Tushar Raut is a second-year LLM student in Business Law with a diploma in Cyber Law and prior publications in corporate, cyber, and competition law.