Uneasy options - AML enforcement through judicial or administration system?
When seeking enforcement of China’s Anti-monopoly law, complainants face a tough choice: wade through the judicial system or rely on the investigations of the administrative authority? Each has its pros and cons
Issue: February 2011
Keywords (click to search):
Fangda
Qihoo 360
QQ
AML
enforcement
judicial
administrative
A recent high profile commercial dispute between Tencent and Qihoo 360 has attracted worldwide attention and forced hundreds of millions of users to choose sides. The conflict started with Tencent’s launch of an upgraded version of the security software QQ Doctor, which gained about 40% of the market share almost overnight after it was bundled with Tencent’s wildly popular instant messaging software QQ in early 2010 (mostly at the expense of Qihoo 360’s antivirus software). On October 11 2010, Qihoo 360 alleges in its “privacy protection white paper” that the users of QQ are susceptible to losing their private data, a security risk that can be minimised by installing Qihoo 360’s privacy protector. In response, Tencent blocked service to QQ users whose computers were installed with Qihoo 360’s software on November 3 2010 under the claim that it compromised certain functions of QQ.
The war...
Please login or register below to read this article.