Make the rules heavier for companies with more power in the market, to protect their business partners and users
Steps to make it happen
- Governments build a yardstick to spot the big companies that many people and shops depend on.
- Officials look not only at how much a company sells but also at whether people have somewhere else to switch to.
- Governments sort companies into a few levels based on the results, and the higher the level, the more rules a company must follow.
- Companies at the top levels must give early notice and a reason when they change trading rules or prices.
- Governments ban unfair tricks, such as putting only a company's own products in the most visible spots.
- Users and small shops can take their own data and move to another company.
- Small companies get lighter rules so that it is easier for them to start a new business.
- Countries match their yardsticks and apply the same rules to companies that do business across borders.
- The idea that a company with more power has more responsibility becomes normal all over the world.
Water so far 💧 0
The proposal in detail
This proposal is a way of designing rules in which the weight of the rules placed on a company matches how much power that company holds in the market. Power is measured not only by size, such as sales or number of users, but also by how hard it is for business partners and users to do business or live without that company. In other words, it is measured by the depth of dependence. For example, if many small shops can reach customers only through a certain online shopping site or booking service, that company can fall into a higher level even if it is not especially large. Companies are divided into about three levels. Companies at the lowest level face only the same general rules that apply today. Companies at the higher levels are required to give advance notice and an explanation of the reasons when they change trading terms or fees, to not unfairly favor their own products in search and display, to provide a way for users and business partners to take their own data and move to other companies, and to set up a dispute-resolution desk where an independent third party handles complaints. The level of each company is decided by a competition authority that is independent of the government. The authority makes its reasons public, and companies can object. Decisions are reviewed every few years, and a company whose power has weakened goes back down to a lower level. For companies that do business across borders, the authorities of each country share the yardsticks and information for these decisions and make the content of the rules as similar as possible.
BenefitsProtects weak shops and users and makes new challenges easier
By matching the weight of the rules to the size of the power, small partner shops and individual users become less exposed to sudden changes in terms or unfair treatment. If advance notice and an explanation of reasons are required, shops can plan their business more easily, and users can choose services knowing what they are agreeing to. When people can take their data and move to another company, the wall against switching gets lower, and new companies have more room to compete with better services. Also, because the rules are kept light for small companies, the burden of starting a business or entering a market does not grow, and the entrance to competition does not get narrower. Another advantage is that, instead of investigating for many years after a violation has happened, the behavior that must be followed is shown in advance, so problems can be prevented before they grow. By bringing rules against monopolies, consumer protection, and protection of small businesses together under one idea, responding to an uneven distribution of power, the logic of policies that used to be scattered becomes clear, and it also becomes a common language for countries to cooperate.
DrawbacksLines may be drawn arbitrarily and may dull the drive to grow
The point raised most strongly by opponents is how hard it is to measure "size of power" and "depth of dependence" fairly. If the standards are vague, the authority's judgment could single out only certain companies, or levels could be decided by political motives. Also, because heavy rules are placed on companies once they enter a higher level, companies might deliberately hold back their growth, or split up their businesses to escape the standards. Low prices, convenient services, and large investments in research that only a big company can provide may shrink under the burden of the rules, and users could end up worse off as a result. Banning the favoring of a company's own products in displays and supporting the taking of data to other companies may cost a lot to rebuild the systems, and that cost could be added to prices. In addition, because each country has different economic conditions and different ideas about law, negotiations to match the yardsticks are likely to be difficult, and there is a concern that a loophole would remain, letting companies move their bases to countries with weaker rules. Whether the authorities in charge of the decisions and reviews can secure enough expertise and enough staff is also a challenge.
Learn the background
Competition in markets has long been trusted as a way to deliver better products at lower prices. But with services on the internet, which become more useful the more people gather in the same place, a company that has grown big tends to grow even bigger, and users and business partners tend to lose anywhere else to go. Even when such a company raises its fees one-sidedly, puts its own products first in search results, or suddenly changes its terms, small shops and individuals have no choice but to accept it. Traditional rules against monopolies have mainly relied on stopping company mergers or on investigating for years after a violation has happened, and in fast-changing markets this increasingly comes too late. On the other hand, if the same heavy rules are placed on every company, small and medium-sized firms and newly founded companies with little strength suffer the most from the burden, and big companies end up with the advantage. The fact that rules against monopolies, consumer protection, and support for small businesses have been discussed separately has also made it harder to see the problem they share, which is an uneven distribution of power.
Choose them ready to accept their drawbacks too (up to 5)
It helps pay for the server and the AI's planting
This proposal was written in Japanese by AI (claude-opus-5-5, policy version 2026-10-15d) and translated by AI (claude-sonnet-5-5). Nobody has checked the facts. Read the original (日本語) How the AI writes