Self preferential treatment is a behavior that undermines the competitive order of adjacent markets by implementing self interest behavior on a platform that combines scale and dual identity. The core manifestation of self preferential behavior is self-interest, and it was not until the era of the platform economy that it was first deemed illegal, which is a representative issue in the development of the platform economy. In terms of behavior patterns and competitive effects, self preferential treatment is a typical monopolistic behavior. However, after comparing multiple categories of abusive behavior one by one, it is found that there are obvious shortcomings in the application of antitrust laws. Major jurisdictions such as the European Union and the United States have attempted to form a new deterrent against internet platforms through a series of reports and legislation. On the one hand, these legislative measures demonstrate the shortcomings of existing anti monopoly law regulatory schemes. On the other hand, there is still controversy over whether these reports and legislation can solve the current regulatory dilemma of self preferential treatment. This article believes that the current regulation of self preferential treatment should be comprehensively governed by combining industry regulatory measures on the basis of fully utilizing the analytical framework of antitrust law.

自我优待是在平台兼具规模化和双重身份的前提下,因为实施自利行为而破坏相邻市场竞争秩序的行为。自我优待的行为核心体现为自利,至平台经济时代才首次被认定违法,这是平台经济发展进程中一个代表性的问题。从行为方式和行为产生的竞争效果而言,自我优待属于典型的垄断行为,但逐一对比多个类别的滥用行为以后,发现反垄断法存在明显的适用不足。欧盟与美国等主要辖区通过一系列的报告和立法尝试对互联网平台形成新的威慑。一方面,这些立法举措证明了现有反垄断法规制方案的不足;另一方面,这些报告和立法是否能解决当前自我优待的规制困境仍存在争议。现阶段应当在充分运用反垄断法分析框架的基础上结合行业监管的手段对自我优待进行综合治理。