The 3Q war the Supreme Court upheld the trial of second instance may

the "3Q war" the supreme law trial

 

The

lasted 3 years, continued concern 3Q war Zaixianbolan, Qihoo 360 v. Tencent monopoly case hearing yesterday in the Supreme People’s Court of second instance. The case is not only the antimonopoly law for more than 6 years the Supreme People’s court’s first case of Internet antitrust, and this time the Qihoo 360 raised 150 million yuan compensation, but also China’s Internet history of litigation is the largest amount of monopoly case.

– 360

appeal

request to revoke the judgment of the first instance or to

nearly three years, 3Q war intensified, since the Spring Festival in 2010, Tencent released QQ doctor and upgraded to QQ computer housekeeper, and the formation of a direct competitive relationship between the 360 security guards, the two sides will officially start the war. From the Tencent v. 360 unfair competition, 360 Tencent defamation counterclaim, and then to the Tencent 360, it became an Internet drama.

last November, 360 to the Guangdong high court prosecution alleged abuse of Tencent in the instant messaging software and services related to market dominance, constitute a monopoly, requesting the court to order the Tencent to compensate for the economic loss of 150 million yuan. Guangdong High Court of first instance dismissed all claims of Qihoo, the Qihoo to appeal to the Supreme court. Yesterday in the second instance, 360 points: appeal revoked the first instance verdict, and remanded and commuted law; support a trial appeal, is ordered to immediately stop the infringement of civil Tencent monopoly abuse of market dominance, including but not limited to software defined QQ and Qihoo trading company, the user shall not bind behavior tying security software products in the QQ software; compensation for economic loss of 150 million yuan, at the same time to make an apology.

refuses to accept the first instance verdict

360 said that the verdict of the relevant geographic market "is not recognized, which belongs to the basic facts of the case identified is not clear; at the same time for the analysis of the relevant product market of the hypothetical monopolist test (SSNIP test) method, the relevant geographic market and Tencent have errors in the relevant market has not identified the dominant.

360, Tencent in the relevant market share of more than 1/2, shall be presumed to have a dominant market position; Tencent QQ software manager and instant messaging software bundled tying to upgrade QQ software and install the QQ Butler name of doctor, should be recognized as a tie-in. This behavior undermines the security management software market competition, consumers do not have any benefits. The Tencent’s "one of two" restrictions on trading behavior, forcing the user to stop using and uninstall 360 software, otherwise it will stop providing QQ and related software services, resulting in 360 software products are a large number of users to uninstall, delete, causing huge economic losses to 360, should be liable for damages.

five controversial focus

trial, for many complex problems, law >