The Metaverse represents one of the most transformative technological shifts of the 21st century. More than a virtual playground, it is emerging as a vast ecosystem with the potential to reshape commerce, social interaction, and global markets. As tech giants stake their claims, concerns over market concentration, monopolistic behavior, and gatekeeping have become urgent. Addressing these challenges requires competition law to evolve beyond its traditional scope. This thesis examines how European Union (EU) and United States (US) competition law frameworks address abuse of dominance and monopolization in digital markets and, by extension, the Metaverse. The analysis begins with the foundations of competition law, moves to the regulation of digital platforms, and concludes with the unique challenges of regulating the Metaverse.
The first section outlines the Metaverse’s technological foundations and identifies the small group of dominant companies shaping its development. It highlights the economic stakes and legal risks posed by a concentrated market, framing the need for strong competition regulations. The second section compares traditional EU and US competition law, focusing on market definition, market share measurement, and the identification of dominance or monopoly power. These insights form the basis for addressing more complex digital market issues. The third section focuses on digital platforms, examining practices such as self-preferencing, gatekeeping, and data-driven power. It contrasts the EU’s proactive approach, especially through the Digital Markets Act (DMA), with the US’s case-by-case antitrust model, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each. This sets the stage for how both systems can adapt to effectively regulate competition in the Metaverse.
By linking past, present, and future, this study contributes to the global debate on digital market regulation, arguing that without timely and coordinated action, the Metaverse risks falling under the control of a few powerful actors, with profound consequences for innovation, consumer choice, and economic diversity.