Qihoo鈥檚 appeal over Tencent鈥檚 monopolistic status rejected
Source: Agencies |
October 17, 2014, Friday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
<p>The Supreme People鈥檚 Court yesterday rejected an appeal by anti-virus software company Qihoo 360 Technology Co against the ruling that Tencent was not guilty of exploiting its monopolistic market position, ending a three-year legal fight between the two Chinese Internet giants. </p><p>The supreme court upheld the original verdict that Tencent had not created a monopoly in the instant messaging market.</p><p>The court said 鈥渃urrent evidence is not sufficient to prove Tencent鈥檚 dominance of the market,鈥 though it acknowledged the company has captured over 80 percent of both the PC-based and mobile instant messaging service markets. </p><p>Under the first decision made by the Guangdong Provincial Higher People鈥檚 Court in March last year, Qihoo was also ordered to pay 790,000 yuan (US$129,000) to Tencent in legal fees.</p><p>Qihoo brought the case to the Guangdong court in April 2012 after Tencent in late 2010 pulled its popular online chatting software QQ from computers installed with Qihoo鈥檚 anti-virus tools.</p><p>Qihoo argued Tencent hurt its legitimate business income and stopped users from using other value-added services.</p><p>The Guangdong court ruled in March last year that the plaintiff鈥檚 request for 125 million yuan was not supported, and Qihoo appealed the verdict and brought the case to the supreme court, which announced the verdict yesterday. </p><p>In a separate lawsuit, Qihoo was ordered in February this year to pay 5 million yuan to compensate Tencent for illicit competition after it launched a computer safety software to block users from installing other value-added services related to Tencent鈥檚 QQ.</p><p>The lawsuits between Qihoo and Tencent are the first Internet company anti-trust cases in China.</p><p>Anti-trust law professor Sheng Jiemin from Peking University said the supreme court鈥檚 final judgement was prudent and professional, and will set an example for future handling of similar cases by courts. Sheng was present in court during the trial.</p><p><b>Boundary defined</b></p><p>Sheng said the supreme court has defined the boundary between fair competition and abuse of dominant status. The law doesn鈥檛 oppose companies in gaining dominant market status through fair competition, but it opposes abuse of that status, such as excluding or limiting other competitors, he said.</p><p>Fang Xingdong, founder of bokee.com, one of China鈥檚 first blogging platforms, said full competition is the best way for innovation, but sometimes competitors have crossed the line.</p><p>鈥淭he lawsuit鈥檚 significance is that it makes Internet companies understand the boundaries of competition, and makes them behave themselves,鈥 said Fang.</p><p>Zhao Zhanling, a researcher at the intellectual property center of the China University of Political Science and Law, said competition accelerates industrial development, so justice authorities should be prudent when judging and intervening in competition. </p>
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 娌狪CP璇侊細娌狪CP澶05050403鍙-1
- |
- 浜掕仈缃戞柊闂讳俊鎭湇鍔¤鍙瘉锛31120180004
- |
- 缃戠粶瑙嗗惉璁稿彲璇侊細0909346
- |
- 骞挎挱鐢佃鑺傜洰鍒朵綔璁稿彲璇侊細娌瓧绗354鍙
- |
- 澧炲肩數淇′笟鍔＄粡钀ヨ鍙瘉锛氭勃B2-20120012
Copyright 漏 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
