Web search war: Renren v. Baidu
When an online pharmacy brokering platform accused internet search giant Baidu of tampering with its search results ranking in 2009, it was a case that made headlines and tested the fledgling Anti-monopoly Law. In the wake of the final decision, a provincial high court, for the first time, issued a detailed discussion on three key elements of abuse of market dominance disputes
Issue: November 2011
Keywords (click to search):
Fangda
Renren
Baidu
antitrust
competition
anti-monopoly
abuse of dominant position
abuse of dominance
Since its enactment in August 2008, administrative enforcement of the PRC Anti-monopoly Law (中华人民共和国反垄断法) (the AML) has been far more active than private enforcement through civil litigation. The three agencies in charge of AML enforcement, the Ministry of Commerce (Mofcom), the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (the SAIC), and the National Development and Reform Commission (the NDRC), have each released their own rules concerning AML-related business practices within their jurisdiction. Despite guidance from the regulators, the court has generally been reluctant to express its opinions on the scope of AML violations.
Most of the cases filed around the country were either dismissed on procedural grounds or settled during litigation. More than three years after the AML came into effect, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) has yet to officially release its interpretation on issues related to AML civil cases after several rounds of revisions (Provision of the Supreme People’s Court...
Please login or register below to read this article.