In this episode, recorded in person at the SCiDA Conference 2026, Anush Ganesh sits down with Professor Michal Gal, Professor of Law at the University of Haifa and one of the world's foremost competition law scholars, as well as ASCOLA President between 2016 and 2023, to discuss her decades of research on competition law, algorithms, and digital markets.

They explore how the "winner takes all" dynamic has evolved, drawing on her most recent work on the topic with Raz Agranat, before turning to her co-authored research with Jorge Padilla on how algorithms reshape competition enforcement. Michal then reflects on her influential work with Dan Rubinfeld and Oshrit Aviv on zero-price markets and the most pressing concerns in data markets today.

The conversation revisits her prescient article on algorithmic consumers, which she described at the SCiDA Conference 2026 as more relevant than ever, before closing by asking whether radical restorative remedies have a role in the current enforcement landscape, with reference to her paper co-authored with Nicholas Petit.

In this episode, Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng are joined by Dr Julian Nowag, Associate Professor at the University of Hong Kong and Lund University, Managing Editor of the Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, and Associate at the Oxford Centre for Competition Law and Policy.

Julian is one of the most versatile scholars working in competition law today, with major contributions spanning sustainability, digital markets, and artificial intelligence. His monograph Global Antitrust and Sustainability (OUP, 2025) maps how competition authorities around the world engage with sustainability as a regulatory objective across economics, law, and enforcement.

His co-authored article with Thomas Cheng, Algorithmic Predation and Exclusion, won a Concurrences Antitrust Writing Award in 2023 and has reshaped how scholars and practitioners think about data-driven exclusionary strategies.

The conversation covers the contested place of sustainability in competition analysis, whether classical predatory pricing doctrine can handle the precision and scale that algorithmic targeting enables, and how the DMA, DMCCA, and Section 19a GWB interact with the broader trajectory of the field.

In this episode, recorded on 27 May 2026 at the SCiDA Conference in Düsseldorf, Anush Ganesh and Sarah Hinck co-chair a plenary panel exploring the UK's Strategic Market Status regime under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act and Germany's Section 19a GWB.

Magali Eben (University of Glasgow; Vice-President, ASCOLA) and Konstantina Bania (Brunel University; Geradin Partners) examine the CMA's early moves under the DMCCA, from the Google and Apple SMS designations to the newly launched Microsoft investigation, and ask whether the CMA is building a coherent enforcement strategy or risking fragmentation across its growing toolkit.

Bjorn Christian Becker (Humboldt University of Berlin) and Jan-Frederick Gohsl (University of Munster) then take a deep dive into the regulatory architecture and recent case law under Section 19a, including the Bundeskartellamt's Amazon decision.

The panel discussed how the bespoke, discretion-heavy design of the DMCCA and Section 19a compares with the DMA's prescriptive model, and whether that flexibility is a regulatory strength or a source of legal uncertainty.

The discussion moves also to the strikingly different approaches to private enforcement: the UK's rapidly expanding collective proceedings docket against digital platforms running alongside public DMCCA enforcement, set against Germany's deliberate restriction of private Section 19a claims to cases preceded by a Bundeskartellamt prohibition decision.

The panel also engages on whether either regime is equipped to address competition challenges raised by AI, foundation models, and AI-powered services, or whether entirely new legislative thinking is needed.

In this episode, Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng are joined by Dr Liana Japaridze (Lecturer in Competition Law, University of Glasgow) and Dr Ece Ban (DPhil, University of Oxford) to explore how competition law travels across borders and adapts to the challenges of digital markets.

Liana discusses her pioneering work on legal transplants of competition frameworks from the EU and the US into the Western Balkans, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, including the creation of the first Georgian-language textbook on competition law.

Ece draws on her experience as a qualified lawyer at the Istanbul Bar to examine the Turkish Competition Authority's approach to platform dominance, data-driven conduct, and algorithmic practices, and whether a DMA-inspired conversation is taking shape in Türkiye.

She also presents her research on how regulation functions as an input in abuse analysis under Article 102 TFEU, proposing a "reality check" framework for managing the growing overlap between competition law, the DMA, and the GDPR.

The conversation moves from the maturity of digital markets in the Caucasus and Türkiye to the broader question of whether Article 102 will stagnate in the shadow of the DMA or continue to evolve alongside it, with particular attention to jurisdictions that must rely on abuse of dominance provisions alone.

In this episode, Anush and Kena are joined by Dr Xingyu Yan, Assistant Professor at Xiamen University School of Law and recipient of the ASCOLA Best Paper Award in 2021 for his work "Towards a More Competitive Mobile Payment Industry: Standardization and Beyond."

Xingyu's research bridges European and Chinese competition law, offering a genuinely comparative perspective on how different legal systems respond to the challenges posed by digital platforms.

The conversation covers Xingyu's work on interoperability mandates under Article 7 of the Digital Markets Act, where he and Yang Feng propose an "ecosystems competition" framework drawing on the Chinese experience with platforms like WeChat.

We also discuss his joint work with Hans Vedder on operationalising the special responsibility of dominant undertakings under Article 102 TFEU through a minimum efficient scale test, and the central arguments of his recent book, "Competition Law in China and the EU: Institutional Dynamics and Theories of Harm," which examines how the contrasting institutional structures of the EU and Chinese enforcement regimes shape the development of theories of harm in practice.

The episode closes with a broader discussion of whether ex ante regulation through instruments like the DMA represents a necessary evolution or risks undermining traditional ex post competition law enforcement.

In this episode, Anush and Jasper sit down with Dr Andrew McLean, Lecturer in Law and Political Economy at Edinburgh Law School and director of the Edinburgh Competition Law and Economics Network. He was also awarded the Best Junior paper at ASCOLA 2020 for his paper titled, "A Financial Capitalism Perspective on Start-up Acquisitions."

Andrew's forthcoming book "Antitrust and the Age of Asset Management" is due out from Harvard University Press later this year, and his article "Innovation against Change" in the Journal of Antitrust Enforcement has drawn attention for identifying a "rhetoric of innovation" that functions as a modern defence of monopoly power.

The conversation covers Andrew's 'economic goodwill test' for start-up acquisitions and whether it captures the wave of AI acqui-hires reshaping the tech sector, his concept of 'techno-conservatism' as the intellectual successor to the Chicago School, the role of Hirschman's "Rhetoric of Reaction" in understanding how innovation arguments influence courts and regulators.

We also discuss the case for structural remedies in digital markets in light of the AT&T breakup and ongoing proceedings against Google, and what it means for competition law to engage with the qualitative direction of innovation rather than just its quantity. Andrew also previews his new work on venture capital through a competition lens.

Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng speak with Dr Zihao Li (University of Glasgow) and Dr Jiahong Chen (University of Sheffield) about their recent paper (with Weiwei Yi) challenging the dominant regulatory approach to AI hallucination.

Rather than treating hallucination as a simple failure of factual accuracy, Zihao and Jiahong develop a layered taxonomy that includes sycophancy, consensus illusion, oversimplification, and prompt-sensitivity effects, and argue that hyper-optimising for accuracy may paradoxically deepen the very harms regulators seek to prevent.

The conversation examines the EU AI Act, the GDPR, and the DSA before turning to a substantial comparative discussion of China's generative AI regulatory framework, including the Interim Measures for Generative AI Services and earlier rules on deep synthesis and algorithmic recommendation.

The episode explores where the European and Chinese approaches converge around accuracy as a regulatory anchor and where they part ways in terms of institutional design and content governance. The discussion closes with Zihao and Jiahong's proposals for moving beyond accuracy toward epistemic trustworthiness, and whether pluralism, confidence calibration, and reflective design can gain traction amid growing pressures around AI competitiveness.

Here is a link to their paper published with Computer Law and Security Review- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212473X26000520

Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng speak with Jan Blockx, Assistant Professor at the University of Antwerp and member of the Belgian Competition Authority's decision-making body, about the Digital Markets Act and its enforcement record.

Drawing on Jan's research in JECLAP and his recent working paper on meta-regulation, the conversation explores whether the DMA has delivered on its promise to address platform power more effectively than traditional antitrust tools, how gatekeepers are navigating the procedural compliance apparatus, and whether the structural tension between regulatory objectives and platform incentives undermines the entire meta-regulatory approach.

The discussion also covers the interaction between DMA obligations and Article 102 TFEU enforcement, the case for decentralised enforcement through national competition authorities, and whether the Commission's Digital Omnibus proposals represent meaningful simplification or a retreat from regulatory ambition.

Lastly, Jan also discusses the need for EU tech sovereignty on the back of a recent conference he co-organised at the University of Antwerp.

Anush Ganesh and Kena Zheng speak with Binit Agrawal, a lawyer and entrepreneur building an AI-first legal practice for emerging cities in India. Binit previously headed strategy at Lucio, a legal AI company, and is empanelled with the UNDP as an expert on AI and law.

The conversation covers Binit's trajectory from competition law practice at Axiom 5 Law Chambers to legal technology entrepreneurship, his co-authored critique in World Competition of India's Digital Competition Bill 2024 and the case for phased implementation over wholesale adoption, the practical challenges of deploying AI into legal workflows, and what an "AI-first" practice actually looks like on the ground in India's emerging cities.

Binit shares industry perspectives on how foundation models acquire and lock in data, whether existing regulatory frameworks like the DMA and DMCCA can address AI market dynamics, and what India's "frugal AI" model, showcased at the India AI Impact Summit in February 2026, might mean for developing economies. A must-listen for anyone following the intersection of competition law, legal technology, and AI governance.

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.