On the 21st World Intellectual Property Day, Hangzhou Internet Court announced the top 10 cases of judicial protection of IPR in 2020. Represented by TMT DR Team from Llinks Law Offices LLP, Tencent v. Hangzhou Kebei Network Technology Co., Ltd. (Hereinafter referred to as Kebei Company) And Hangzhou Haiyi Network Technology Co., Ltd. (Hereinafter referred to as Haiyi Company) anti-unfair competition case was selected into the list.
This case is a typical case under the moving-forward wave of internet platform economy, providing a characteristic sample of how to explore a new path for internet platform governance and how to regulate the development of internet platform economy.
Case Brief:
Kebei Company and Haiyi Company falsified qualifications in order to register and operate WeChat official accounts and mini programs in batches, post misleading advertisement and counterfeited WeChat official complaint homepage. Tencent filed a lawsuit against the unfair competition on the ground that defendants exerted a negative influence on the ecological health of WeChat platform. After the trial of first instance and second instance, the court hold that as business entities within WeChat platform, the defendants' conduct mentioned above constituted unfair competition and ruled that defendant must stop the infringement and compensate the damages.
Characteristic Value of the Case:
In this case, the court for the first time defined the legal nature of "Internet Platform Ecology", typified by WeChat. And the court has also confirmed that Tencent is entitled to the legal rights and interests in respect of the commercial benefits and competitive advantages based on the Internet Platform Ecology. The case is the first anti-unfair case that deems "Internet Platform Ecology" as the basis of competition rights and interests. Hangzhou Internet Court held that the defendants' behavior constituted destruction of the interactive activities between the WeChat's ecological network nodes and ruined the overall creativity of the WeChat Ecology rather than a simple breach of contract. Thus, applying unfair competition law to adjust the relationship between platform and the business entities in the platform is beneficial to guide all types of users in the platform to comply with principles of good faith and business ethics, to maintain the fair market order in cyberspace, to regulate the internet ecology and to fully protect the rights of both business entities and consumers. This case broke the traditional judicial practice that the internet platform regulates the misconduct of the business owners in the platform within the framework of contract law.
Besides, the court systematically evaluated how the conduct involved damage the Platform Ecology. The court hold that the purpose of the defendant's conduct was to use improper means to grab more trading opportunities than other honest business owners, which destroyed the fairness of the competition and the customers' trust in the WeChat platform, seriously damaged the interests of general consumers, other business entities and also the WeChat, and disrupted the competitive environment and market order of the WeChat's ecosystem. For those reasons above, defendants' conduct constitutes unfair competition.
This case provides a good reference sample for resolving disputes involving the Platform Ecology in the era of platform economy, coming up with new ideas for internet platform to protect its interests from the perspective of competition law.
