Comments On The Legal Cases Of Illicit Competition In Online Field Such As Happy Sunshine V.Guangzhou Wei Si

The newly revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law of 2017 puts the position of "market competition order" in the second general clause and it adds a consumer element.besides,it adds a twelfth "Internet special article".However,since the implementation of the new law,due to the complex and diverse Internet economic disputes,there have been a large number of new Internet cases in the market that cannot be covered by special regulations.Therefore,in judicial practice,the court still needs to apply a large amount of the second general clause to identify unfair competition on the Internet.Happy Sunshine v.Guangzhou Weisi and other cases of Internet unfair competition disputes belong to this kind of situation.The court is still affected by the principle of "non-public interest non-intervention" and the "absolute rights protection" judgment paradigm in the process of hearing such cases by applying general terms To a certain extent,it squeezes the space for operators to compete freely,and there still exists a "planned economic thinking" in which public power is excessively involved in the normal operation of the market.In the case of Happy Sunshine v.Guangzhou Weisi and other Internet unfair competition disputes,both parties should be deemed to have a broad competitive relationship;the behavior occurred before January 1,2018 and has ended,but the 2017 Anti-Unfair Competition Law Cases that are still in the trial process after implementation shall be tried with the new law to confirm the retrospective effect of the law on unresolved cases of unfair competition disputes in the Internet;in the process of determining the unfair competition in the Internet industry by applying the general provisions,the court Should maintain an attitude of restraint;and through the interpretation of the specific business ethics in the Internet industry and the analysis of the "interest measurement" of the interests of all parties,it is concluded that the function of ad blocking and blocking is not unfair competition Conclusion.Make the new law’s "protection of competition" spirit and the "social public welfare,operators ’interests,and consumers’ interests common protection" legislative purpose fully implemented,reflecting the 2017 law’s pursuit of the highest value of social and economic benefits;due to the advertising blocking function and intelligent recommendation function With the "non-infringing substantive function",and neither the defendant knew or should know the situation,and took the necessary measures immediately after receiving the notice,the technical neutral defense reasons claimed by the two defendants wereestablished.