KGI’s work on competition regulation and enforcement in digital markets synthesizes leading research, bridging independent research with policymaking across various jurisdictions. We examine novel regulatory and enforcement tools and strategies, with a focus on understanding which approaches effectively promote competition.
Hardly a day goes by without competition regulation or enforcement involving tech companies appearing in news headlines around the world. From app stores and browsers to social networking, advertising, and AI-powered consumer services, dominant platforms shape how billions of people around the world access information.
KGI works to synthesize leading research on digital markets competition, bridging independent research with policymaking across various jurisdictions.
KGI’s marquee annual gathering, the Digital Competition Conference, brings together researchers, policymakers, regulators, litigators, and industry leaders for evidence-based dialogue on the most pressing competition issues in technology markets. Topics range from remedies in search and browsers to competition challenges in app stores, social networking, connected devices, and AI-powered consumer services. The conference serves as a unique venue in Washington where research and policy experts meet to unpack national, transatlantic, and global tech competition developments.
In collaboration with the Institute for Technology Law & Policy (Tech Institute), KGI is spearheading a research project at the intersection of law and economics to examine how competition authorities are addressing the challenges of regulating digital markets.
From the United States to the European Union to other jurisdictions, competition policy has a long list of challenges when attempting to change digital market realities. This has led to competition authorities developing novel strategies and tools for enforcement, including the enactment of stricter legal obligations, extensive market studies, establishing specialized internal units, and hiring staff with expertise in non-traditional fields for competition authorities. Using legal research alongside economic analysis, this project aims to map these different approaches and assess their impact on competition dynamics in the digital economy.
KGI’s Age Assurance Rules provides practical recommendations for designing age assurance rules that support youth online safety while appropriately accounting for tradeoffs involving privacy, service availability, competition, and openness.
KGI’s Assigning Responsibility for Age Assurance examines how policymakers can allocate responsibility for age assurance across the digital ecosystem. It provides practical recommendations for assigning age assurance obligations in ways that support youth online safety while appropriately accounting for tradeoffs involving privacy, competition, accessibility, and openness.
/
KGI’s latest report in the Measuring Risk series examines what EU risk assessments and US litigation reveal about Snap and YouTube’s approaches to risks on their platforms, with a particular focus on risks to minors. The report explores the gap between what these platforms publicly disclose about risk mitigation and what has emerged through discovery in US litigation, including their own internal research, product development, and risk evaluation.
/
The appeals of the United States v. Google search antitrust case turn in part on whether the remedies ordered address Google’s illegal monopoly in search – or whether, by declining to ban the payments Google makes for search defaults, the District Court has left the conduct at the heart of the case largely intact. In Pay for Half, KGI’s Alissa Cooper joins leading economists and competition experts in showing how the court can reasonably cap those payments rather than ban them, opening at least half of the market to rivals, including emerging AI-powered entrants, while preserving revenue for distribution partners.
/
As the European Commission advances efforts under the Digital Markets Act to require Google to share its search data with competitors, lessons from historic antitrust remedies underscore how data access could be transformational in the AI-powered search market. While the Commission’s proposals represent a novel and comprehensive approach, key improvements to data scope and sharing frequency, privacy protections, and dispute resolution are needed. US courts and enforcers charged with implementing similar provisions should take note.
/
As lawsuits involving AI, social media, privacy, competition, and platform accountability expand worldwide, courts are emerging as central actors shaping technology governance. A new tech litigation tracker developed by the Knight-Georgetown Institute, Tech Justice Law, and Georgetown University’s Communication, Culture & Technology program centralizes and tracks technology-related litigation and regulatory actions across jurisdictions and issue areas.
