电商领域再现“二选一”争议：以巨额罚款，限制商家经营自主权

Core Viewpoint - The recent actions of a major e-commerce platform, which imposed significant fines on merchants for participating in promotional activities on competing platforms, have raised concerns about market competition and the autonomy of merchants [1][2][5]. Group 1: E-commerce Platform Actions - The e-commerce platform has restricted merchants from participating in promotional activities on other platforms, citing the need to maintain "lowest prices" [1]. - A fine of 5 million yuan was reportedly issued to Midea Group for price violations, which was later rescinded after an appeal [3][4]. - The platform's internal representatives claim that these measures are intended to protect consumer interests by ensuring competitive pricing [1]. Group 2: Legal and Regulatory Perspectives - Industry experts argue that the platform's actions may constitute illegal "choose one" behavior, which restricts market competition [2]. - The concept of "most-favored-nation" clauses is raised, suggesting that requiring merchants to offer the best prices on the platform could be seen as anti-competitive [2]. - The potential for abuse of market position through "minimum price agreements" is highlighted, indicating a need for regulatory scrutiny [2]. Group 3: Industry Reactions and Implications - The cancellation of the fine does not negate the fact that the platform previously penalized merchants for lower prices on competing platforms [5]. - Experts warn that such practices could lead to a "negative-sum game," shrinking the overall market for merchants and the home appliance industry [5]. - In response to concerns about fair competition, several major platforms have signed a self-regulatory agreement to promote healthy competition in the e-commerce sector [5].