Beijing Intellectual Property Court released ten typical cases of anti-monopoly and anti-unfair competition

北京市知识产权法院发布竞争垄断十大典型案例

Date:2022-03-16

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court held a conference to report on the top ten typical cases of competition and monopoly. The conference pointed out that the Beijing Intellectual Property Court had accepted a total of 1,436 anti-monopoly and unfair competition cases and concluded 1,244 cases from its inception in 2014 to the end of 2021. Among them , 529 first instance cases were accepted. and 470 cases were concluded, 907 second instance cases were accepted and 774 cases were concluded. Of all the cases concluded, 652 cases were concluded by judgment, or 52%; 43 cases were concluded by mediation, i.e. 3%; 45% of cases ended with a decision to dismiss, grant withdrawal, reject contentious claims and transfer jurisdiction. Among them, 184 competition and monopoly cases were accepted in 2020, 306 in 2021, an increase of almost 66%, and the number of competition and monopoly cases is expected to exceed 500 in 2022.

The cases not only involve traditional industries such as manufacturing and service industries, and important areas such as information security and livelihoods assurance, but also increasingly involve many new areas such as technological innovation and the digital economy.

The typical top ten cases made public by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court include: the case of an association sued for abuse of market dominance; the case of a communications company sued for abuse of a dominant market position; the case of an oil company prosecuted for abuse of a dominant market position; the cause of unfair competition of “Live Browser”; the unfair competition case of renting VIP accounts on video sites at different times; the “record while streaming” and “click and share” unfair competition case; the unfair competition case of the “economic” plug-in; the unfair competition case of unauthorized capture of microblog databases; the “Xisi Steamed Bun” unfair competition case; the case of violation of trade secrets of the list of customers by the golf operators.

Data Source: https://bjzcfy.chinacourt.gov.cn/article/detail/2022/03/id/6579364.shtml

Comments are closed.