Jure Globocnik

Doktorand und wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter

Immaterialgüter- und Wettbewerbsrecht

+49 89 24246-595


Rechtliche Implikationen der datengetriebenen Wirtschaft; Datenschutzrecht; Kartellrecht; Europäisches Wirtschaftsrecht

Wissenschaftlicher Werdegang

Seit 2017
Doktorand und wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb

2016 – 2017
Praktikum bei der Europäischen Kommission in Brüssel

2014 – 2016
Magisterstudium im europäischen und internationalen Wirtschaftsrecht (LL.M.Eur.) an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

2014 – 2016
Masterstudium der Rechtswissenschaften an der Universität Ljubljana

Praktika in internationalen Kanzleien in Stuttgart (Kartellrecht) und Ljubljana (Wirtschaftsrecht und Vertragsrecht)

2009 – 2014
Bachelorstudium der Rechtswissenschaften an der Universität Ljubljana sowie an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (Erasmus-Austausch)

Ehrungen und Stipendien

Goldene Plakette der Juristischen Fakultät der Universität Ljubljana für außerordentliche Studienleistungen

2014 – 2015
Stipendium des Deutschen Akademischen Austauschdienstes (DAAD)

2008 – 2014
Zois-Stipendium (Begabtenförderung der Republik Slowenien)



Smartphone wars und Missbrauch marktbeherrschender Stellung durch Inhaber standardessentieller Patente, Podjetje in delo - Revija za gospodarsko, delovno in socialno pravo Revija za gospodarsko, delovno in socialno pravo 43, 3/4 (2017), 566 - 597.

    Laesio enormis – institut preteklosti? [Laesio enormis – ein Rechtsinstitut der Vergangenheit?], Pravnik 71, 1-2 (2016), 5 - 28.


      Exclusionary Conduct in Data-Driven Markets: Limitations of Data Sharing Remedy (Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 19-04), 2019, 41 S. (gemeinsam mit Vikas Kathuria).

      • The natural consequence of finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU is to offset the harm to consumer welfare by restoring competition through effective remedies. As big data constitutes the most vital resource in data-driven markets, a dominant undertaking can exclude its rivals from accessing user data and thus deprive them of scale in markets that are characterised by network effects. Indeed, the European Commission found Google guilty of excluding its rivals in the Android licensing case by adopting this strategy. It is, however, unclear as to which remedy can most efficiently restore competition in such cases. This paper analyses the viability of mandatory data sharing as a remedy to restore competition in the affected market. The paper approaches this research question from both theoretical and practical standpoints. First, it analyses the viability of mandatory data sharing remedy from legal, economic and, technological perspective, followed by an assessment of such a remedy within the framework of the GDPR. Based on this comprehensive investigation, it concludes that mandatory data sharing is not the optimal solution to remedy loss to consumer welfare. In view of this, reliance can be placed on other behavioural and structural remedies.
      • Available at SSRN


      Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of 26 April 2017 on the European Commission's "Public consultation on Building the European Data Economy", 2017, 13 S. (gemeinsam mit Reto M. Hilty et al.).

      • This Position Statement responds to the Communication of 10 January 2017 by which the European Commission launched a public consultation on the future legal framework for data-driven markets that emerge in the course of the current digitization of industrial production and the advent of smart products in which sensors are embedded. In particular, the Position Statement comments the Commission’s ideas on a possible future data producer’s right as a means of promoting access to data. While the Max Plank Institute agrees that there are indeed instances where there is a need to “unlock data”, it rejects a data producer’s right. Rather, the Institute recommends considering more targeted data access rights that would specifically react to situations in which a manufacturer of smart products would otherwise try to reserve related markets for itself. The Max Planck Institute thereby takes inspiration from the data portability right that has already been implemented as part of the Basic Data Protection Regulation. Moreover, general principles on the design of data access regimes are developed. In sum, the Max Planck Institute favours a sector-specific approach to the introduction of a general data access right or a generally applicable data access regime. Sector-specific rules are especially needed for answering more concrete questions such as regarding the person entitled to claim access or the one of whether a data holder should be remunerated for granting access to data.
      • MPI_Statement_Public_consultation_on_Building_the_EU_Data_Eco_28042017 Copy.pdf
      • Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 17-08
      • Chinese Translation of the Position Statement


      WS 2018/19

      Tutorium im Zivilrecht für Studierende des LL.M.-Programms

      Ort: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München

      WS 2017/18

      Tutorium im Zivilrecht für Studierende des LL.M.-Programms

      Ort: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München