مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی

مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی

تبانی در بستر بلاک‌چین (مطالعۀ تطبیقی در حقوق رقابت اتحادیۀ اروپا و ایران)

مقالات آماده انتشار

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان
جواد حسین زاده 1
معصومه اکبریان طبری 2
1 دانشیار، گروه حقوق خصوصی، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه علم و فرهنگ، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار، گروه حقوق خصوصی، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه علم و فرهنگ، تهران، ایران
10.22059/jcl.2026.410065.634862
چکیده
بلاک‌چین باکاهش هزینه‌های مبادله و عدم ‌تقارن اطلاعاتی، اعتماد به بازار دیجیتال را افزایش داده و زمینۀ‌ رقابت پویا در بازارهای فناوری و نوآوری را فراهم می‌سازد. با این ‌حال، تمرکز داده‌ها و امکان ایجاد شبکه‌های ارتباطی قدرتمند در این بستر، زمینه‌ساز توافق‌ها و رفتارهای هماهنگ میان کنشگران می‌شود؛ امری که در ساختار غیرمتمرکز و فاقد نظارت سنتی، چالشی جدی برای حقوق رقابت پدید می‌آورد. نگارندگان در این پژوهش در جستجوی پاسخ روشن به این پرسش اساسی هستند که آیا حقوق رقابت ایران ظرفیت مواجهه با تبانی در قالب توافقات یا رفتارهای هماهنگ را در بستر بلاک‌چین دارد یا آنکه مستلزم تدوین مقررات رقابتی خاص است؟ در پژوهش حاضر با روش تطبیقی- تحلیلی، رویکرد حقوق رقابت اتحادیۀ‌ اروپا و ایران در خصوص وضعیت تبانی در بستر بلاک‌چین بررسی، و ضرورت بازنگری در انگاره‌های سنتی حقوق رقابتِ ایران آشکار شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند در بلاک‌چین‌های خصوصی و کنسرسیومی، به سبب دسترسی محدود کاربران و کنترل متمرکزتر، رفتارهای هماهنگ محتمل‌تر است، درحالی که در بلاک‌چین‌های عمومی، با توجه به گستردگی مشارکت‌کنندگان و ماهیت غیرمتمرکز شبکه، تبانی از طریق شکل‌گیری توافق‌ها و کارتل‌ها افزایش می‌یابد. در اتحادیۀ‌ اروپا، این اعمال، مظنون به نقض موازین رقابتی‌اند و با توسل به قاعدۀ معقولیت، بر پایۀ تأثیرات شبکه‌ای و آثار تبادل داده ارزیابی می‌شوند. درمقابل، نظام حقوقی ایران با خلأ قانونی و فقدان تجربۀ‌ عملی در این حوزه مواجه است؛ هرچند با تفسیر موسع مادۀ ۴۴ قانون اجرای سیاست‌های کلی اصل ۴۴ و برخی مواد سند شورای عالی فضای مجازی، امکان به‌چالش کشیدن برخی مصادیق تبانی در بستر بلاک‌چین وجود دارد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
بلاک‌چین
تبانی
توافقات مخل رقابت
حقوق رقابت
رفتار هماهنگ.
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Collusion in the Blockchain context Comparative study in competition law in the European Union and Iran

نویسندگان English

Javad Hoseinzadeh 1
Maumeh Akbarian Tabari 2
1 Associate Prof. Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Prof. Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran.=
چکیده English

Blockchain, by reducing transaction costs and information asymmetry, enhances trust in the digital market and paves the way for dynamic competition in technology and innovation markets. However, the increasing concentration of information and the potential to create powerful communication networks within this environment facilitate the formation of agreements and concerted practices among users. In a decentralized structure, this poses a serious challenge to competition law due to the absence of oversight and traditional regulatory mechanisms. This study seeks a clear answer to the fundamental question of whether Iranian competition law possesses the capacity to address collusion, whether in the form of agreements or concerted practices within the blockchain environment, or whether it instead requires the formulation of specific competition regulations. Employing a comparative-analytical approach, the study examines the competition law frameworks of the European Union and Iran regarding collusion in blockchain environments, thereby highlighting the need to revisit traditional paradigms of Iranian competition law. The findings indicate that in private and consortium blockchains, due to limited access and more centralized control, concerted practices are more likely to occur. In contrast, in public blockchains, given the broad participation of contributors and the decentralized nature of the network, collusion will be increased by the formation of agreements and cartels. In the European Union, these actions are suspected of violating competition law and are assessed through the application of the rule of reason, taking into account factors such as network effects and the implications of data exchange. In contrast, Iran’s legal system faces a legislative gap and a lack of practical experience in this field. However, through a broad interpretation of Article 44 of the Law on the Implementation of the General Policies of Principle (44) of the Constitution and certain Articles of the Supreme Council of Cyberspace’s documents, it is possible to challenge certain instances of collusion within the blockchain environment.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Anti-Competitive Agreements
Blockchain
Collusion
Competition Law
Concerted Practices.
A) Books
1. Ghaffari , Behnam (2019). Competition Law. Tehran: SAMT. ISBN: 978-600-02-1997-0 (In Persian).
2. Hoseini, Mina (2021). Competition Law in the Mirror of the Structure and Decisions of the Competition Council. Tehran: Majd (In Persian).
3. Rahbari, Ebrahim; Sangani, Vahid Hasani (2021). Competition Law in the Realm of Intellectual Ownership: Misuse of Dominant Position, Concentrations and Competition Remedies (Vol. I). Tehran: SAMT. (In Persian).
4. Schrepel, T. (2021). Blockchain+ antitrust: The decentralization formula. Edward Elgar Publishing.
5. Shotlekova, Gergana Toshkova (2023). Blockchain Technology and Competition Law. Master Thesis, Faculty of Law, Lund University, European Business Law, 30 ECTS, Supervisor: Julian Nowag
 
B) Articles
6. Akbarian Tabari, M., & Jafarzadeh, M. (2025). Competitive Analysis of Supply Restrictions in Vertical Agreements: A Comparative Study in American, European Union, and Iranian Law. Journal of Legal Studies, 17 (3), 81–126. DOI: 10.22099/JLS.2024.50641.5180 (In Persian).
7. Blewett, R., Kennis, M., & Chance, C. (2023). EU vertical agreements. Practical Law, European Union.
8. Brambilla, E. M. (2025). Algorithmic tacit collusion: Addressing the gaps in article 101(1)(a) of the TFEU. Cambridge Law Review, 10(2), 77–100
9. Breu, S. U., & Paterson, C. (2019). Blockchains and cybercurrencies challenging antitrust and competition law. Law, Ethics Society: Historical Contemporary Perspectives, 205-215.
10. Davilla, M. (2022). Unravelling the Complexity of Blockchain and EU Competition Law. Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 13(6), 387-400.
11. Dimitropoulos, G. (2020). The law of blockchain. Washington Law Review, 95, 1117–1192.
12. Enchelmaier, S. (2023). Restrictions ‘by object’after Generics, Lundbeck, and Budapest Bank: are we any wiser now? Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 11(Supplement_1), i72-i101.
13. Ezrachi, A., & Stucke, M. E. (2020). Sustainable and unchallenged algorithmic tacit collusion. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 17(2), 217–260.
14. Ezrachi, A., & Stucke, M. E. (2016). Virtual competition. Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 7(9), 585–586
15. Harrington, J. E. (2020). Horizontal and vertical agreements: Differences between the European Union and the United States. Анали Правног факултета у Београду, 68(1), 7-27.
16. Hauser, H. (2024). Fixing Algorithmic Pricing? Competition Concerns and Solutions. Colo. Tech. LJ, 23, 1.
17. Hutchinson, C. S. (2020). The Challenges of Blockchain Technology to Competition Law. Legal Issues Digit. Age, 1, 32-53
18. Hutchinson, C. S., & Egorova, M. A. (2020). Potential Legal Challenges for Blockchain Technology in Competition Law. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 13(1), 81-107.
19. Jafarzadeh, Mirghasem; Akbarian Tabari, Masoumeh (2021). Competitive Analysis of Non-Price Restraints in Vertical Agreements (A Comparative Study of American, European Union, and Iranian Law). Private Law Research, 9(35), 37–75. DOI: 10.22054/JPLR.2022.59920.2551 (In Persian).
20. Karimi, Sahar; sinmberi, Parisa (2025). Applicability of Legal Rules Combating “Abuse of Dominance” in Blockchain Ecosystems: A Comparative Study of Iranian and EU Law. Private Law Research, 13(50), 205–246. DOI: 10.22054/JPLR.2025.86460.2933 (In Persian).
21. Lianos, I. (2019). Blockchain competition. Ph. Hacker, I. Lianos, G. Dimitropoulos & S. Eich, Regulating Blockchain: Political and Legal Challenges, OUP.
22. Lindeboom, J. (2022). Formalism in competition law. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 18(4), 832-880.
23. Maggiolino, M., & Zoboli, L. (2021). Blockchain governance: The missing piece in the competition puzzle. Computer Law & Security Review, 43, 105609.
24. Mak, C. H. W. (2024). A comparative analysis of blockchain and competition law in the European Union and the United States: decentralization, data accumulation and collusion. European competition law review, 45(7),1-17.
25. Maringele, S. K. (2021). Competition Law and Blockchain Technology (Distributed Ledger Technology).
26. Majcher, K., & Botta (2025).  M. Blockchain Interoperability: Implications for EU Competition Law. Available at SSRN 5238467,1-25.
27. Miller, E. (2020). A tale of two regulators: antitrust implications of progressive decentralization in blockchain platforms. Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online, 77, 387.
28. Mohsin, K. (2021). Blockchain Law: A New Beginning. Available at SSRN.
29. Nazzini, R. (2018). The Blockchain (R) Evolution and the Role of Antitrust. King's College London Law School Research Paper, 2019-20
30. Rahbari, Ebrahim (2023). Algorithmic Price Fixing: A Comparative Study on US, EU ‎and Iranian Competition Law. Comparative Law Review, 14(1), 269–290. DOI: 10.22059/jcl.2023.345558.634394 (In Persian).
31. Rengifo García, E. (2021). Blockchain and Competition Law. GRUR International, 70(2), 113-114.
32. Sadeghi, Mohsen; Dindar, Morteza (2022). Concerted Practice in Competition Law (Comparative Study in Iranian and EU Law). Journal of Trade Studies, 25(101), 229–249. DOI: 10.22034/ijts.2021.246916 (In Persian).
33. Sadeghi, M., Molapanah, S., & Safari, M. (2023). Application of Blockchain in Protecting Intellectual Property Rights and its Practical Dimensions. Journal Private Law, 20(1), 31–44. DOI: 10.22059/jolt.2023.358036.1007195 (In Persian).
34. Schwerin, S. (2018). Blockchain and privacy protection in the case of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Delphi study. The Journal of British Blockchain Association, 1(1), 1–77.
35. Schoning, F., & Tagara, M. (2019). Can Your Blockchain Attract the Attention of Competition Authorities to Open an Investigation. CLPD, 5, 57.
36. Schrepel, T. (2019). (A) Is Blockchain the death of antitrust law? The Blockchain antitrust paradox. Geo. L. Tech. Rev., 3, 281.
37. Schrepel, T. (2019). (B)Collusion by blockchain and smart contracts. Harv. JL & Tech., 33, 117.
38. Schrepel, T. (2020). The Theory of granularity: a path for antitrust in blockchain ecosystems. Available at SSRN 3519032,1-50.
39. Seele, P., Dierksmeier, C., Hofstetter, R., & Schultz, M. D. (2021). Mapping the ethicality of algorithmic pricing: A review of dynamic and personalized pricing. Journal of Business Ethics, 170(4), 697-719.
40. Treacy, P., & Latham, A. (2020). Blockchain and Competition Law. European Competition Law Review, 41, 602-608.
41. Yildiz, O., & Weber, R. H. (2023). Market Definition and Market Power in the Era of Blockchain. Zeitschrift für Europarecht, C1-C28.
 
C) Cases
42. CFI, Case T-41/96 (2000).
43. CFI, Joined Cases T-202/98, T-204/98 and T-207/98, Tate & Lyle v Commission (2001). CJEU, Case C-41/90, Höfner and Elser v Macrotron (1991)
44. CJEU, Case 48/69, Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd. v Commission (1972), par. 64.
45. CJEU, Case C-209/07 (2008), ECLI:EU:C:2008:643.
46. CJEU, Case C-230/16, Coty Germany GmbH v Parfümerie Akzente GmbH (2017).
47. CJEU, Case C-298/22 (2024)
48. CJEU, Case T-41/96, Bayer AG v Commission of the European Communities (2000), para. 69.
49. Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/720 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices (EU).
50. Commission report on the review of the Digital Markets Act,2026.
51. Danish Competition Council, Decision in Case No. 18/19827: Ageras Has Infringed Competition Rules (2020).
52. Digital Markets Act, Regulation 2023/1886 (EU)
53. EWCA Civ 13; [2020] 4 C.M.L.R. 13, Ping Europe Ltd v Competition and Markets Authority (2020).
54. Guidelines on the Applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to Horizontal Co-operation Agreements, European Commission, 2023 (EU).
55. Guidelines on Vertical Restraints, European Commission, 2022 (EU).
56. Statutes & Documents
57. Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (EU).
 
D) Website
58. Blanquez, Luis (2023). Antitrust Guidelines for Companies Using Blockchain Technology. Available at: https://www.bonalaw.com/insights/legal-resources/antitrust-guidelines-for-companies-using-blockchain-technology.
59. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Blockchain Technology and Competition Policy,Issues Paper by the Secretariat (2018) https://one.oecd.org/document/DAF/COMP/WD(2018)47/en/pdf, 7.
مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی

مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده
انتشار آنلاین از 01 دی 1405