The Dispute Between QQ And 360 Has Become The "Melamine" Of The Internet Industry.

The "very" competition between Tencent and 360 forces hundreds of millions of users to face the difficult choice of network tools, which tests the legislative mechanism of our competition law and the administrative efficiency of the competent departments, as well as the long-term ecological environment of Chinese Internet enterprises' competitive culture.

In November 5th, under the perspective of competition law, sponsored by the Institute of law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Both sides are suspected of violating "

On the 5 day of the seminar, experts attending the economic law generally said that in the "3Q" dispute, Tencent Inc forced users to choose "two elections" between QQ and 360 software.

"QQ has 600 million users in China and accounts for more than 77% of the market share of China's instant messaging market, which is fully consistent with the eighteenth criteria for the identification of monopoly in the anti-monopoly law."

Huang Jin, a researcher at the Academy of Social Sciences, said that under the circumstances, the Tencent Inc issued a letter that forced hundreds of millions of QQ users to carry out the "stand up battle", which is an abuse of their dominant market position.

The vice president of the Graduate School of the Academy of Social Sciences also believes that the "self reliant" approach adopted by Tencent in the "3Q" dispute is trying to resist the 360 software with 600 million users, which objectively limits the competition among the 360 companies.

"Tencent has no doubt violated the provisions of the sixth anti monopoly law," no abuse of dominant market position, exclusion and restriction of competition ".

The literary state said, "the industrial and commercial sectors should be stopped in accordance with the anti monopoly law."

The "very difficult decision" made by Tencent Inc on the 3 day was also questioned by jurists in the field of anti unfair competition law.

Researcher Huang Jin and Professor Wu Hongwei of Renmin University of China law school believe that Tencent Inc requests QQ users to use QQ services only after unloading 360 software.

"This is obviously contrary to the wishes of consumers, and is a forcible paction without justification."

Huang said that when the Tencent announced the "hard decision", it had violated the twelfth provision of the anti unfair competition law, that is, the operator sells goods, and he may not sell the goods against the buyer's wishes or add other unreasonable conditions.

Tencent Inc is not the only offender in the "3Q" dispute.

Professor Wu Hongwei and professor of China University of Political Science and Law School of economics and law, Liu Jifeng also pointed out that the 360 companies accused QQ of "peeping users' privacy", which is also suspected of violating the French law.

Whether the QQ software has peep the user privacy is still waiting for authentication.

But before that, the 360 companies spread such information, according to the fourteenth provision of the anti unfair competition law, which has the suspicion of damaging the goodwill of their competitors.

Professor Wu Hongwei said.

The fourteenth provision of the anti unfair competition law stipulates that operators should not fabricate or disseminate false facts to damage the commercial reputation and reputation of competitors.

Mao Xiaofei, a fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences and an expert in anti monopoly law, has different opinions on this.

She pointed out that the market of instant messaging software has particularity, "market share" can not be regarded as the sole criterion for determining the dominant position of the market, but also the difficulty of "market entry".

"In the" 3Q "dispute, we can see that MSN and other chat software can quickly replace the share of QQ. We can see that Tencent Inc's monopoly is only presumption.

She said that whether the Tencent Inc is really perceived by the public as a matter of fact is in violation of the anti monopoly law in a monopolistic position.

The relevant person in charge of the Ministry of industry and commerce also believes that the debate on "3Q" continues until now. Whether Tencent Inc has "peep into user privacy" and whether "abuse of market power" has not been corroborated.

Therefore, whether the competition behavior of two enterprises can be strictly applied to the "anti monopoly law" and "Anti Unfair Competition Law" still have doubts.

Yao Haifang, a professor at the Law School of Renmin University of China, argues that there is no need to stick to the one-to-one correspondence of the law.

He pointed out that even if Tencent and 360 companies compete in this competition, they can not strictly abide by the provisions of the anti-monopoly law and the anti unfair competition law. However, the two acts are indeed in violation of the general provisions of the second anti unfair competition law, which "damages the legitimate rights and interests of their operators and disrupts the social and economic order".

In the field of competition law, abstract clauses are also binding.

Yao Haifang said, "no matter what the facts are, there is no doubt that the two companies violated the anti unfair competition law in the" 3Q "dispute.

The "3Q" dispute has posed severe challenges to the legislation and enforcement of the existing competition law.

As professor Liu Jifeng said, "the contradictions on this network platform involve many jurisdictions, such as the anti-monopoly law," Anti Unfair Competition Law "," contract law "and so on, which infringe upon the rights and interests of many parties.

What kind of competition norms do the network world need? How should national power be involved? These are new questions raised by the competition law in the Internet age.

According to Huang Jin's researcher, China's current network world is still in the era of "jungle ecology" lacking competition rules. In reality, competition law is difficult to regulate the new field of network.

Li Shunde, deputy director of the intellectual property center of the Academy of Social Sciences, believes that the reality and the Internet can not be "broken". The norms of competition law in the real society can also be applied in the network environment.

However, he added that the existing competition law needs to be revised and supplemented to meet the needs of the Internet age.

Considering the competitive power of the Internet, the power of modern technology is easily abused by enterprises, thus becoming a tool that endangers the public interest. Professor Liu Jifeng also agrees to improve the competition law from the legislative aspect.

He pointed out: "how to restrict enterprises that have not reached the dominant position of the market, but with corresponding technical strength, and adopt a fair and free way of competition is a problem that needs to be solved in the future revision of the" anti monopoly law "and" Anti Unfair Competition Law ".