Case Tencent 360 privacy infringement in the Chaoyang District Court. Odd Tiger Court Beijing, Chi Chi software and three infinite three defendants stopped issuing using the 360 in connection with privacy protector, remove content related Web sites in connection with the infringement, in 360 Web site Home and legal daily 30th public apology and compensation for loss of plaintiff’s $ 400,000.
Judgment of the Court are as follows:
Beijing odd Tiger Chi Chi software and three infinite three defendants stopped issuing 360 Privacy Protector V1.0beta version involved (SAM explain, 1.0beta Edition includes several versions, including test both want Taobao, MSN software and later released versions of QQ software);
Second, Beijing odd Tiger 360 three defendants in 360 Web site delete Security Center, 360 forums, 360 Privacy Protector software development team blog, and the user privacy than days of identifying infringement involved in this case in a special Web page content;
Three, the three defendants in the 30th from the commencement of this judgment in 360 Web site Home and made a statement on the legal daily, eliminating the violations involved adverse effects caused to the plaintiff (content retention, 30th),
Four, three defendants compensation loss of $ 400,000;
Five rejected the other claims.
In the judgment, the Court also pointed out that:
By identifying the facts in the present case: 360 Privacy Protector when monitoring QQ2010 software, QQ2010 software scans executable files on your computer, use the “your privacy may be involved”. In this regard, the Court believes that
(1) on the “Privacy”, the general understanding from the public on privacy, privacy refers to the individual than people or do not want to open things or information;
(2) “360 Privacy Protector” for QQ2010 software may involve monitoring prompts privacy files are executable files. In fact, involved these executable files are not related to the user’s privacy;
(3) the 360 in the white paper on privacy protection on the “Privacy” expressed clearly defined as “executable file itself does not involve users Privacy”;
Summing up the above “360 Privacy Protector” for QQ2010 software may involve monitoring prompts privacy file, not in line with objective facts, and the odd Tiger Corporation, strange intelligence software companies to define their own privacy standard
Do not match. Here, despite the use of the “possible”, but it makes the user a insecurity, leading to renounce the use of or results to avoid using QQ2010 software, so that “might” become a determining
Conclusions are bound to create users in the use of “360 Privacy Protector” after negative awareness and evaluation on the QQ2010 software.
In addition to the above “360 Privacy Protector” monitor prompt, in the “360 Privacy Protector” interface terminologies 360 and 360 Web site Security Center, 360 forums, 360 privacy software development for small
Group blog, in a special Web page of the user privacy than day also has a certain number of QQ software evaluation and presentation. These evaluation and presentation, using a “peep”, “for the benefit of peep”, “look into your
Private files “,” such as mount at the back of a malicious “, hooliganism, inverse days-track, complaints, peeping QQ users for a long time, up to carefully use words such as QQ and QQ to evaluation software. Expression of the premise, is
The above “may involve your privacy” was established. But through the above discussion does not involve use of QQ2010 software in connection with the user’s privacy. In addition, the assessment words and expressions, with a strong
Emotional and has a negative rating effects and misleading results. In particular, these representations are without any factual basis, does not meet commercial criteria of honesty and credit, does not meet the requirements of maintaining order in the legitimate and reasonable competition in the market. The above
Purpose of the Act, is that damages the plaintiff’s competitive advantages;
“360 Privacy Protector” monitor prompts and interface language in the language and 360 Web site exists on the evaluation and expression, not to adopt a true statement of facts, fabricating facts of how, with the obvious intention of unfair competition, harm plaintiff’s business reputation and the reputation of goods, constitutes a commercial slander.
Legal experts in Yu Guofu microblogging says: “he believes that the main intention is not in contention for the District of $ 400,000. Both sides of even greater importance is a yes/no question. Judgment we restore a fact, QQ there is no privacy issue and the so-called Privacy Protector does not actually protect users ‘ privacy, but proceeding from own likes and dislikes threaten competition. ”
On October 14, 2010, Tencent official prosecution of 360 companies unfair competition, sought compensation from the 360 companies 4 million Yuan, and demand an apology from 360 to Tencent company 3 months.
Tencent said in the complaint, on September 27 last year, found odd Tiger 360 to provide “360 Privacy Protector”, through the monitoring of Tencent QQ chat software running, use of false propaganda a means, mislead and deceive users, defamation of the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s product ‘ peep ‘ privacy of the users, products and services to the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s reputation caused great damage. ”
This 360 that “in addition to the 360, a Microsoft Process
Monitor, Comodo, AVG, QQ detectives and other monitoring tools found QQ exception, Tencent is to be prosecuted? “” QQ see private after the incident, the Tencent false news that 360 related yellow and
Using technical means comprehensive ban 360 Privacy Protector download, block Internet users to download, this 360 to raise counterclaims. ”
Case on November 3, 2010 Beijing Chaoyang District Court formally accepted. On December 14, 2010, the case formally heard in Beijing Chaoyang district people’s Court, Court Court has not pronounced on that day.
Text/TechWeb
Tags: apology, competition, consecutive, found, Tencent, unfair
No comments:
Post a Comment