特级无码毛片免费视频播放,国产午夜亚洲精品久久,国产午夜精品理论片久久影院,内射巨臀欧美在线视频,精品伊人久久大线蕉色首页,亚洲色偷偷偷综合网,亚洲成在线aⅴ免费视频,亚洲444kkkk在线观看

Unitalen Obtained Pre-trial Behavioral Preservation in the Tencent v. Oppo et al Unfair Competition Case

July 12, 2018

Case Summary

 

Oppo and ATC (jointly as “the respondents”) implemented a series of acts on Oppo mobile phones, including forcing registration of Oppo account and popup window prompting for password identity verification when users install the “Tencent Mobile Phone Manager” downloaded from the official website of Tencent (the applicant) and download applications in the “Tencent Mobile Phone Manager”, which has disrupted users’ experience and normal operation of Tencent’s software, interfered users’ selection and hindered the normal installation of the downloaded software. The evidence submitted by the applicant also showed that the respondents differentiated the user experience between the applicant’s “Tencent Mobile Phone Manager” product and the products of the respondents and other competitors.

 

Tencent therefore filed an application for Pre-trial Behavioral Preservation with Wuhan Intermediate People's Court against Oppo, ATC and Henghua Operation Division.

 

The Ruling

 

Wuhan Intermediate People's Court held that the following factors shall be considered: 1) The applicant is the interested party of this case and is entitled to filing a preservation application. 2) There is a likelihood that respondents have constituted unfair competition, by differentiating the user experience between the applicant’s “Tencent Mobile Phone Manager” product and the products of the respondents and other competitors, which intentionally interferes the normal use of the applicant’s application with worse experience to influence users’ selection, so as to take advantage of the reputation, market influence and user base of the applicant’s application for promoting the respondents’ own products. In addition, as an Oppo mobile phone dealer, Henghua Operation Division’s sales of mobile phones has increased the impact on the applicant, thus may constitute contribution to unfair competition acts. 3) If the above behavior is not stopped in time, it will seriously jeopardize the applicant’s interest and may cause irreparable damage to the applicant’s competitive advantage and market share. 4) Ordering the respondents to stop misconduct will not harm public interests, as the preservation measures will only require the respondents to stop the interfering behavior and will not affect the normal use of the Oppo mobile phone itself or adversely affect the interests of consumers and market order. 5) The applicant has provided a corresponding guarantee. As for the determination of the amount of guarantee and the form of guarantee, it requires a comprehensive consideration of factors such as the likelihood of the applicant’s success and the possible loss that may be suffered by the respondents due to preservation measures. In this case, the applicant provided a guarantee in the form of a 10-million-yuan liability insurance guarantee letter issued by an insurance company. The amount and form of the guarantee met all the requirements.

 

Based on the above, Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court ruled that 1) The respondents, Oppo and ATC, shall immediately stop the setting on the Oppo phones that will redirect users to the page of “Oppo Application Store” when they download and install “Tencent Mobile Phone Manager” application through the applicant’s official website, or any other behavior in similar manner. 2) The respondents, Oppo and ATC, shall immediately stop the setting of identification verification prompt popup window and redirecting users to “Oppo Application Store” when they download and install applications in the applicant’s “Tencent Mobile Phone Manager”, or any other behavior in the similar manner. 3) The respondent Henghua Operation Division shall suspend the sale of Oppo mobile phones before Oppo and ATC stop the above-mentioned behaviors.

 

Typical Significance

 

The case was listed among “Top Ten Typical IP Cases in 2017” in Hubei Province.

 

  1. The case reflects the new conflict in the mobile Internet industry competition, which is typical and attracts much attention from the society. As mobile phone manufacturers, the respondents in this case took advantage of the underlying system of the mobile phone and used technical means to interfere with the normal operation of the software legally provided by the applicant. The applicant initiated the litigation, applying for pretrial behavioral preservation and then claiming 80 million yuan’s damage against the respondents. The respondents argued that its behavior was to maintain the safety of mobile phone use instead of unfair competition. The dispute of this case occurred before the latest amendment of the Unfair Competition Law, and there was no direct legal basis for judging this case. The handling of this case directly affects the demarcation of the competition boundary of related industries and the regulation of the competition order. As a new type of case in the country, with both sides being well-known technology companies - "Tencent" and "Oppo", the case has attracted great attention.

 

  1. The case reflects the timeliness of behavioral preservation for effective prevention of misconduct and further expansion of damage. There is no established practice for this type of case in China yet, but the court has considered that infringement carries the characteristics of rapid speed, wide range, and large impact in the Internet environment; that in addition to the fast turnover for Internet products, once the user experience is damaged, the user base is lost and the usage habit is changed, it will be difficult to repair; and that if the above behavior of the respondents is not prohibited in time, it will seriously infringe on the interests of the applicant and may cause irreparable damage to the applicant’s competitive advantage and market share. Therefore, the court reviewed the application and quickly issued an injunction to the respondents. This has laid a good ground for the subsequent handling of the case.

 

  1. The case detailed the respondents’ misconduct, detailed the misconducts that should be stopped, and provided direct guidelines for regulating competition behaviors and competitive order in the related industries. And due to the fair and efficient pre-trial junction ruling made by the court, the misconducts were promptly stopped, laying a good foundation to both parties for settlement. After communication with both parties, the court eventually prompted the two sides to shake hands and even concluded agreement for in-depth cooperation.

 

Keywords

主站蜘蛛池模板: 欧美亚洲日本日韩在线| 动漫人妻无码精品专区综合网| 欧美人与禽zozo性伦交视频| 国产稚嫩高中生呻吟激情在线视频| 高中生自慰www网站| 亚洲日韩欧美国产另类综合| 成人午夜福利免费体验区| 成人无码α片在线观看不卡 | 亚洲日韩中文第一精品| 亚洲综合成人婷婷五月在线观看| 国产又黄又硬又湿又黄的| 国产日韩制服丝袜第一页 | 最新精品国偷自产在线下载| 亚洲人色婷婷成人网站在线观看| 中文无码不卡的岛国片| 在线看免费无码av天堂| 亚洲精品无码不卡av| 奇米四色7777中文字幕| 国产亚洲人成无码网在线观看| 日韩精品中文字幕无码专区| 久久综合丝袜日本网| 无遮挡啪啪摇乳动态图| 波多野结衣不打码视频| 制服丝袜av无码专区完整版| 亚洲欧美日韩国产国产a| 久久人人97超碰超国产| 另类亚洲小说图片综合区| 国产精品专区第1页| 亚洲日本中文字幕一区二区三区| 久久婷婷人人澡人爽人人喊| 日韩精品无码一区二区三区视频 | 国产成人无码av在线播放无广告| 暖暖视频 免费 日本社区| 少妇张开双腿自慰流白奖 | 国产精品久aaaaa片| 色播在线精品一区二区三区四区| 国产午夜成人精品视频app| 中文无码一区二区视频在线播放量 | 亚洲日韩在线a视频在线观看| 亚洲午夜无码久久久久小说| 午夜dy888国产精品影院|