SUMMARY
The move comes as Indian startups have been lambasting the industry body for an alleged leaning towards Big Tech
In the submissions, IAMAI rejected the ex-ante regulations appeal, adding that such measures could limit the growth of India’s digital economy
IAMAI added that there was no consensus among competition laws and economics experts on which ex-ante approach to follow
After two weeks of controversy and infighting, the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) has reportedly submitted its final arguments to the Committee on Digital Competition Law (CDCL). The move comes as Indian startups have been lambasting the industry body for an alleged leaning towards Big Tech.
The CDCL was established in February by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) to evaluate whether India requires a separate Digital Competition Act and to draft one.
In the submissions, IAMAI rejected the ex-ante regulations appeal, the ET reported. The industry body argued that such measures could limit growth in relevant markets, impacting the digital economy as a whole.
The IAMAI has also suggested that the suitability of ex-ante provisions in a proposed digital competition law should be assessed after analysing their impact on investment, innovation, business model diversity and consumer welfare.
The industry body, though, has added that there was no consensus among competition laws and economics experts on which ex-ante approach to follow or whether ex-ante regulation is necessary to regulate digital platforms.
Ex-ante is a Latin term that means ‘before the event’ and in this context, the term implies that the recommendations would regulate certain behaviour or actions before they happen, as a deterrent to the said behaviour or actions. For example, companies could be subject to the new provisions even before becoming large or dominant.
However, the industry body has yet to alter its stance against the recommendations made by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance on Big Tech and its regulation. In its draft recommendations issued earlier this month, IAMAI said, “Pre-emptive standards coupled with rigid and size-based designation mechanisms risk having an adverse impact on investments, innovation, consumer choice and welfare.”
IAMAI also stated that the panel’s suggestion of identifying Systemically Important Digital Intermediaries (SIDIs) can harm the competitive conduct in the digital ecosystem.
The industry body had also claimed that the suggestion lacked clarity and was based on unfounded assumptions. However, this also invited pushback from Indian tech startups, which said that IAMAI’s position was not in favour of them.
Last week, there were reports of a controversy brewing over IAMAI’s alleged support for Big Tech interests, with the industry body’s president Subho Ray writing to members that an “overwhelming majority” was against a separate competition law for digital companies.
What’s more, many startup members of the IAMAI alleged that the industry body lacked ‘credence’ and demanded changes to the leadership of the apex body, which is currently chaired by Google India’s country head and vice president Sanjay Gupta, with WhatsApp India public policy director Shivnath Thukral as vice-chairman.
Many tech startup founders also accused IAMAI of taking the side of Big Tech. IAMAI’s membership includes major tech startups such as Paytm, Ola, PhonePe, Unacademy and BYJU’S, along with Big Tech such as Meta, Microsoft and Google.
It remains to be seen whether the CDCL would accept IAMAI’s recommendations, given the outrage of tech startups in light of the same.
The IAMAI submission to CDCL also comes amid reports that startups are looking to make a parallel industry body that could work to protect India’s startup ecosystem, away from any influence from big tech companies.
