...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Sriwijaya Law Review >Dispute Settlement between Telkomsel and Indosat: An Analysis on Competition of Cellular Operator
【24h】

Dispute Settlement between Telkomsel and Indosat: An Analysis on Competition of Cellular Operator

机译：Telkomsel和Indosat之间的争端解决：蜂窝核竞争分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Telecommunication advancement has become a central part of human life brought tight competition among cellular operators. On June 2016, there was a case of business competition between Telkomsel and Indosat (the big Three Cellular operators in Indonesia) that conduct monopoly practice and predatory pricing. In Indonesia, there are two Institutions that maintain business telecommunication and business competition namely Indonesian Telecommunication Regulatory Body (BRTI) has mandated by Law number 36 of 1999 and Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) by Law Number 5 of 1999. The research aims to know how the government regulates on competition of cellular operator in Indonesia and to know the role of Indonesian Telecommunication Regulatory Body (BRTI) and Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) to settle the cases on competition of cellular operator (Telkomsel and Indosat cases). The study is normative legal research with statute and case approach, by using juridical qualitative approach. The results of this research are, firstly the analysis of regulation regarding on competition of cellular operator. Secondly the analysis of the role of Indonesian Telecommunication Regulatory Body (BRTI) and Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) to settle the cases on competition of cellular operator (Telkomsel and Indosat cases) that conduct monopoly practice and predatory pricing, regarding with Law Number 36 of 1999 on Telecommunication and Law Number 5 of 1999 on the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practice and Unfair Business Competition.
机译：电信进步已成为人类生活中的核心部分，在蜂窝运营商之间带来了紧张的竞争。 2016年6月，Telkomsel和Indosat（印度尼西亚的三个蜂窝运营商之间有一个商业竞争，以垄断实践和掠夺性定价。在印度尼西亚，有两项制度，维持商业电信和商业竞争，即印度尼西亚电信监管机构（BRTI）由1999年第36号法律第36号法律规定，由1999年第5号法律规定。该研究旨在了解政府如何调节印度尼西亚蜂窝经营者的竞争，并了解印度尼西亚电信监管机构（BRTI）和商业竞争监管委员会（KPPU）的作用，解决细胞运营商竞争（Telkomsel和Indosat案件）。该研究采用法律定性方法与法规和案例方法进行了规范性的法律研究。本研究的结果是，首先是对细胞算子竞争的调控分析。其次，分析印度尼西亚电信监管机构（BRTI）和商业竞争监管委员会（KPPU）的作用，解决了对垄断实践和掠夺性定价进行垄断实践和掠夺性定价的案件的案件。 1999年关于1999年第5号法律禁止垄断实践和不公平的商业竞争。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号