Web search war: Renren v. Baidu

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 on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Monopoly Civil Cases (最高人民法院关于审理垄断民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的规定(征求意见稿). The latest revision was circulated in April 2011, hereinafter known as “the Draft SPC AML Interpretation”). In July 2010, the Beijing High People's Court (the High Court) decided on the Renren v. Baidu case, in which Renren accused Baidu of abusing its market dominance by lowering Renren website's ranking from Baidu's natural search results. In this case, a provincial high court for the first time provided a detailed discussion on three key elements related to abuse-of-market-dominance AML disputes: the scope of the relevant market, determination of market dominance and abuse of market dominance. The decision may provide important guidance to future AML litigants.