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 abuses

The 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.