Informe jurídico sobre la Resolución N°0030-2018/SDCINDECOPI
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2023-07-31
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
DOI
Resumen
El presente informe contiene un análisis del contenido de la Resolución N°0030-
2018/SDC-INDECOPI, la cual se dio en el marco del Expediente N°0031-
2015/CD1-INDECOPI a raíz de la denuncia de América Móvil Perú S.A.C. (en
adelante, América Móvil) en contra de Entel Perú S.A.C. (de ahora en adelante,
Entel) por infracciones a la leal competencia en las modalidades de engaño,
legalidad, denigración y comparación indebida. Al respecto, en este informe se
analizará en específico la publicidad alusiva dada en las campañas publicitarias
“Experiencia 4G-Entel” y “Entel Prepago – Superbolsas” y la consecuente
comparación indebida. Siendo así, a través del uso de la Ley de Represión de la
Competencia Desleal, aprobada mediante Decreto Legislativo N°1044 (en
adelante, LRCD), jurisprudencia y doctrina se llegó a la conclusión de que el
criterio de Indecopi no es suficiente para determinar la alusión inequívoca
indirecta puesto que en oligopolios altamente concentrados no será necesario el
factor de elementos adicionales para establecer publicidad alusiva, dado que la
estructura del mercado será suficiente para que el receptor de la publicidad
pueda identificar y determinar a qué empresas de la competencia se está
haciendo referencia. Finalmente, también se critica lo determinado por esta
entidad pues no se tomó en consideración todos los factores alegados por el
denunciante, haciendo deficiente su resolución.
This report contains an analysis of the content of Resolution No. 0030-2018/SDCINDECOPI, which was issued within the framework of Case No. 0031-2015/CD1- INDECOPI following the complaint by América Móvil Perú S.A.C. (hereinafter referred to as "América Móvil") against Entel Perú S.A.C. (hereinafter referred to as "Entel") for violations of fair competition in the forms of deception, illegality, denigration, and improper comparison. In this report, we will specifically analyze the advertising content presented in the "Experiencia 4G-Entel" and "Entel Prepago - Superbolsas" advertising campaigns, as well as the consequent improper comparison. Therefore, by using the Unfair Competition Repression Law, approved by Legislative Decree No. 1044 (hereinafter referred to as the "UCRL"), jurisprudence, and doctrine, it was concluded that Indecopi's criteria are insufficient to determine unequivocal indirect allusion since in highly concentrated oligopolies, additional elements are not necessary to establish allusive advertising, as the market structure itself is sufficient for the recipient of the advertising to identify and determine which competing companies are being referred to. Finally, this entity's determination is also criticized for not considering all the factors alleged by the complainant, rendering its resolution deficient.
This report contains an analysis of the content of Resolution No. 0030-2018/SDCINDECOPI, which was issued within the framework of Case No. 0031-2015/CD1- INDECOPI following the complaint by América Móvil Perú S.A.C. (hereinafter referred to as "América Móvil") against Entel Perú S.A.C. (hereinafter referred to as "Entel") for violations of fair competition in the forms of deception, illegality, denigration, and improper comparison. In this report, we will specifically analyze the advertising content presented in the "Experiencia 4G-Entel" and "Entel Prepago - Superbolsas" advertising campaigns, as well as the consequent improper comparison. Therefore, by using the Unfair Competition Repression Law, approved by Legislative Decree No. 1044 (hereinafter referred to as the "UCRL"), jurisprudence, and doctrine, it was concluded that Indecopi's criteria are insufficient to determine unequivocal indirect allusion since in highly concentrated oligopolies, additional elements are not necessary to establish allusive advertising, as the market structure itself is sufficient for the recipient of the advertising to identify and determine which competing companies are being referred to. Finally, this entity's determination is also criticized for not considering all the factors alleged by the complainant, rendering its resolution deficient.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Competencia económica desleal--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Publicidad engañosa--Perú, Telefonía celular--Perú, Oligopolio--Perú
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este artículo se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess