摘要： 为保障数字经济创新发展,提升平台国际竞争力,应减少使用反垄断法规制平台自我优待。平台自我优待为平台组织化和内部权力化的产物,本质上属于数字私权力的不当行使。而反垄断法作为平台外部规制工具,在应对平台自我优待时,存在适用前提、条件、效果上的不足。平台自我优待是对平台中立义务的违反,属于过错推定责任类型,其违法性需借助比例原则进行个案判断。在进行具体判断时,应区分为资源配置型自我优待、秩序维护型自我优待,并由此导向不同判断标准。从平台自我优待的数字私权力滥用定性出发,可以在事前、事中和事后阶段,通过程序设置、商家权利赋予、平台内部决策民主化、平台主体责任强化、侵权责任与行政处罚等制度,实现平台自我优待的综合规制。

关键词: 数字私权力, 自我优待, 平台中立义务, 侵权责任, 行政责任

Abstract: To ensure the innovative development of the digital economy and enhance the international competitiveness of platforms, the application of anti-monopoly laws to regulate self-preferencing by platforms should be exercised with caution.Self-preferencing by platforms is the product of platform organization and internal power structuring, and essentially represents the improper exercise of digital private power.As an external regulatory tool for platforms, anti-monopoly law has deficiencies in terms of application premises, conditions, and effects when dealing with self-preferencing by platforms.Self-preferencing by platforms violates the obligation of platform neutrality and falls under the category of presumed fault liability, with its illegality requiring individual case judgments based on the principle of proportionality.In making specific judgments, it should be differentiated into resource allocation type self-preferencing and order maintenance type self-preferencing, which leads to different judgment standards.Starting from the essence of the abuse of private power in self-preferencing by platforms, comprehensive regulation can be achieved through the coordination of systems such as procedural settings, granting of merchant rights, democratization of internal platform decision-making, strengthening of platform's main responsibility, and infringement liability and administrative penalties at the pre-event, in-event, and post-event stages.

Key words: Digital Private Power, Self-preferencing, Platform Neutrality Obligation, Tort Liability, Anti-Monopoly Law