Competition Investigation Launched Against 7 IT Companies

The Competition Authority announced on its website that an investigation has been launched against 7 enterprises operating in the information and communication technologies sector. The Authority conducted a preliminary investigation on the allegation that the undertakings in question violated an article of the Law on the Protection of Competition.

The Law on the Protection of Competition by making gentleman’s agreements in the labor market.It violates the article ‘Restricting Competition Agreement, Concerted Practices and Decisions’. The preliminary investigation, which started with the allegation, was decided by the Competition Board. The 7 companies for which an investigation decision has been made are listed as follows:

Companies that have been decided to initiate an investigation:

• Etiya Information Technologies Software Industry and Trade Inc.
• Pia Bilişim Hizmetleri A.Ş.
• Innova Information Solutions Inc.
• NETAS Telecommunication Inc.
• MAGIS Technology Inc.
• Caffeine Software Services Tic. AS
• RDC Partner IT Consulting and Technology Services Inc.

The Competition Authority stated in the announcement that the decision in question was for informational purposes and that the companies in question violated the Law No. 4054 and faced penalties. cannot be interpreted expressed. The law numbered 4054, which will ensure that sanctions are applied in case the allegations about the companies are correct in the investigation, are as follows:

Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (Article 4)

Agreements between undertakings, concerted practices and such decisions and actions of associations of undertakings that have the purpose of preventing, distorting or restricting competition directly or indirectly in a particular good or service market, or that have or may cause such an effect. illegal and prohibited.

These cases are, in particular:

• a) Determining the purchase or sale price of goods or services, factors such as cost and profit forming the price, and any purchase or sale conditions,
• b) Dividing the markets for goods or services and sharing or controlling all kinds of market resources or elements,
• c) Controlling the supply or demand of goods or services or determining them outside the market,
• d) Making it difficult or restricting the activities of rival undertakings, or taking the undertakings operating in the market out of the market by boycotting or other behaviors, or preventing new entrants to the market,
• e) With the exception of exclusive dealership, applying different conditions to persons in equal status for equal rights, obligations and actions,
• f) Contrary to the nature of the agreement or commercial practices, obliging the purchase of a good or service together with another good or service, or making a good or service demanded by buyers acting as an intermediary undertaking the condition of displaying another good or service by the buyer, or assertion of conditions regarding the re-supply of a good or service.

In cases where the existence of an agreement cannot be proven, price changes in the market or the balance of supply and demand or the activity areas of undertakings are similar to those in markets where competition is hindered, distorted or restricted, that the undertakings are in concerted action constitutes a presumption. Provided that it is based on economic and rational facts, each of the parties can avoid responsibility by proving that they did not act in concert.

Those who act prohibited in Articles 4, 6 and 7 of the Law will be determined by the Board. an administrative fine of up to ten percent of their annual gross income is given.