Huang Yong:360The monopoly case against Tencent has far-reaching impact

Guangming.com4month15Japan NewsYesterday, "from'360The case against Tencent: "Looking at China's Anti-Monopoly Law" series of lectures were held at Peking University. This is one of the series of forums on the "Organization, Regulation and Competition" of the Center for Law and Economics of Peking University.

Huang Yong, expert from the Anti-Monopoly Committee of the State Council and professor at the Law w88 casino of the w88 casinomeans,360The prosecution of Tencent for monopoly has attracted discussion and attention from many scholars because it involves anti-monopoly and anti-unfair competition. Although our country does not have much experience in the trial and judgment of antitrust laws, this case has positive significance for the judgment of related cases in the future. It is very normal for there to be many debates about Internet antitrust,360The greatest social significance of the monopoly case against Tencent is that it helps promote the development of the Internet in the direction of innovation and openness, and promotes the professional practice of antitrust law in the Internet industry.

Xue Zhaofeng, co-director of the Center for Law and Economics at Peking University, believes that the most critical point in this case is whether Tencent abused its market dominance. The final verdict and process are worthy of further study and discussion by the academic and judicial circles.

Wang Yong, associate professor at the Institute of Economics, w88 casino of Humanities and Social Sciences, Tsinghua University, said that althoughQQFree, but actually Tencent is based onQQThe platform market can charge other software vendors. This case uses the framework of a unilateral market to define the identification of a two-sided market. Such a judgment cannot well distinguish between a volatile market and a unilateral market. Sheng Jiemin, a professor at Peking University Law w88 casino, believes that360The monopoly case against Tencent is a groundbreaking classic case, and the court's work is relatively professional and meticulous. But because it is groundbreaking, it lacks experience and there are many places where questions and discussions can be raised. Ambiguities arise in some places, such as the conclusion that the “relevant market” is wrongly defined. The issue of geographical definition is also debatable. There are still contradictions in the judgment. It is not so convincing geographically and the analysis is not that thorough. But overall, it is a good thing to have such discussions.

The famous economist Zhang Weiying has his own views. He has reflected and criticized monopoly from an economic perspective and hopes to return to the basic issues, namely the definition of property rights and freedom.

In addition, Shen Kui, a professor at Peking University Law w88 casino, believes that the purpose of antitrust law is to protect the rights and interests of consumers. On the other hand, whether the administrative law enforcement agencies can enforce the law against suspected monopoly companies according to theoretical assumptions is also a very critical factor.

Trial verdict, court decision360Losed the lawsuit, determined that Tencent did not have a monopoly and dismissed it36012811_12874QQThe definition of the competitive environment as a "global market" and other related issues have aroused strong concern from all walks of life and netizens.

Attachment: Original report link

http://it.gmw.cn/2013-04/15/content_7320047.htm

Reprinted by Xinhuanet

http://news.xinhuanet.com/info/2013-04/15/c_132310101.htm

Reprinted by ifeng.com

http://finance.ifeng.com/news/tech/20130415/7908413.shtml

21CNFinancial reprint

http://finance.21cn.com/stock/qqcj/a/2013/0415/23/21086401.shtml

Reprinted by Xinmin.com

http://tech.xinmin.cn/2013/04/15/19746789.html

Related report links:

Zhongcai.com: The first Internet antitrust case 360All requests rejected

http://www.cfi.net.cn/p20130329001804.html
China Daily:3QQihu lost the battle and the Guangdong High Court ruled that Tencent did not constitute a monopolyhttp://www.chinadaily.com.cn/hqcj/zgjj/2013-03-29/content_8627288.html

Xinhuanet:“The first Internet antitrust case”Market identification related to the judgment is the focushttp://news.xinhuanet.com/tech/2013-03/29/c_124520233.htm