Publications

The world of audiovisual online markets is rapidly changing. Not long ago, it was dominated by linear television, transmitted terrestrially, through cable networks or via satellite. Recently, streaming services such as Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Prime and others have emerged as new suppliers of audiovisual content. In this quickly changing industry, competition interrelations between such different formats such as traditional TV, videos on YouTube, and streaming via Netflix are subject to controversy. In particular, doubt is cast on services such as YouTube exerting competitive pressure on services such as Netflix and traditional TV. Based upon a survey with 2920 participants, we provide an empirical analysis of consumption behavior of audiovisual contents. Using descriptive and analytical statistics, including multiple equation models, we show that there are specific areas within audiovisual content markets, where YouTube exerts considerable competitive pressure on both Netflix and classic TV, for instance, through prime time video entertainment. However, our analysis yields differentiated results as we also identify areas, where competition intensity between different service types appear to be low, for instance, through daytime and regarding the intention to shorten waiting time.

Der Beitrag analysiert mögliche spezielle Wettbewerbsprobleme, die in Medienmärkten auftreten können, und ihre Implikationen für die Wettbewerbsordnung. Es wird beleuchtet, ob klassische medienspezifische Wettbewerbsprobleme in der Digitalwirtschaft noch bestehen und welche neuen Beschränkungen auftreten, wie bspw. der Zugang zum Publikum als neue Marktzutrittsschranke sowie Gatekeeping-Effekte aufgrund von vertikaler Integration und Selbstbevorzugungsstrategien. Die derzeit stattfindende Ausweitung der wettbewerbspolitischen Missbrauchsaufsicht wird begrüßt, allerdings wird eine hierzu komplementäre aktivere Zusammenschlusskontrolle eingefordert, insbesondere auch gegenüber nicht-horizontalen Fusionen, welche wettbewerbsgefährdende Strukturen in digitalen Ökosystemen schaffen.

In the last couple of years, organizations have demonstrated an increasing willingness to share data, information and intelligence regarding emerging threats to collectively protect against todays sophisticated cyber attacks. Accordingly, several vendors started to implement software solutions that facilitate this exchange and appear under the name cyber threat intelligence sharing platforms. However, recent investigations have shown that these platforms differ significantly in their functional scope and often only provide threat data instead of the promised actionable intelligence. Moreover, it is unclear to what extent the platforms implement the expected intelligence cycle processes. In order to close this gap, we investigate the state-of-the-art in scientific literature and analyze the functional scope of nine threat intelligence sharing platforms with respect to the intelligence cycle. Our study provides a comprehensive list of software functions that should be implemented by cyber threat intelligence sharing platforms in order to support the intelligence cycle to generate actionable threat intelligence.