文章指出，法治既是抵御不正当竞争的"防火墙"，也是企业安心发展的"定心丸"，是破解"内卷式"竞争 的重要手段。当前，破解"内卷式"竞争是全国统一大市场建设中的一个重要课题。强保护才能激励创新 创造。以法治维护市场公平竞争秩序，才能更好破除"内卷"。法治有保障，经营主体就有信心。用好法 治之钥破"内卷"，需以严格公正执法司法划出公平竞争底线。用好法治之钥破"内卷"，需加大规则供给 和引领。当下，随着平台经济、数字经济发展，人工智能、数据权益保护等领域出现很多新挑战。例 如，某短视频平台的"变身漫画特效"，其人工智能模型结构和参数被其他公司直接使用，如何追责？有 公司非法爬取海量数据、使用搬家软件"盗图抄店"，如何规制？这些都是新类型不正当竞争案件。及时 通过完善立法、明晰司法裁判规则等予以回应，才能让规则成为引领行业健康发展、维护新兴领域市场 竞争秩序的"风向标"。 ...

法治既是抵御不正当竞争的"防火墙"，也是企业安心发展的"定心丸"，是破解"内卷式"竞争的重要手段 当前，破解"内卷式"竞争是全国统一大市场建设中的一个重要课题。两个案例，给人启示。 一个关于强保护。 吉某车企下属公司40名高管及技术人员先后"跳槽"至另一家车企，这家车企在没有技术积累或合法技术 来源的情况下，利用吉某车企的底盘零部件图纸技术，短期内推出某系列型号电动汽车，令吉某车企遭 受巨大损失。 有计划有组织"挖人"、攫取他人竞争优势的恶性竞争如何惩治？最高人民法院适用2倍惩罚性赔偿，判 决侵权人赔偿吉某车企经济损失及维权合理开支合计约6.4亿元，创我国知识产权侵权诉讼判赔数额历 史新高。这一裁判为行业公平竞争划出红线，也为新能源汽车长足发展提供法治引领。 强保护才能激励创新创造。以法治维护市场公平竞争秩序，才能更好破除"内卷"。 一个关于强信心。 江苏一家机械科技公司先后被竞争对手3次提起专利侵权诉讼，在前两次胜诉的情况下，对方在该公司 申请上市时，发起第三次诉讼，企图通过诉讼破坏企业商誉、阻断其发展进程。该公司负责人决定应 诉，并提出反诉。 对于恶意诉讼，守规矩的企业会吃亏吗？不会！最终，竞争对手的诉讼 ...

Core Points - The case involving the software "Xiao Wang Shen" highlights the issue of unfair competition in the e-commerce sector, leading to a court ruling that ordered the defendants to pay 30 million yuan for their actions [1][4][6] - The ruling clarifies the legal boundaries of data rights protection in the digital economy, addressing the gray area of data scraping and its implications for data security and privacy [1][7] Group 1: Case Background - "Xiao Wang Shen" software gained popularity for its features that allowed users to easily access competitors' sales data and download product images, which were deemed as unfair competitive practices [1][3] - The software operated by reverse-engineering the data protection algorithms of a legitimate e-commerce analytics tool, "Shengyi Canmou," effectively restoring sensitive data that should have been protected [3][4] Group 2: Legal Proceedings - The e-commerce platform filed a lawsuit against the developers of "Xiao Wang Shen" in November 2023, focusing on whether the platform had rights to its commercial secrets and data, and if the defendants engaged in unfair competition [4][5] - The court determined that while some data could be classified as commercial secrets, the broader collection of data created through user authorization also warranted protection under unfair competition laws [5][6] Group 3: Court Ruling and Implications - The court ruled that "Xiao Wang Shen" violated data rights by undermining the competitive advantage of the legitimate analytics tool, leading to a significant loss of revenue for the e-commerce platform [5][6] - The ruling established a layered protection system for data rights, distinguishing between commercial secrets, competitive rights over public data, and the original data based on collection legality [7][8] Group 4: Industry Impact - Following the ruling, the companies involved in "Xiao Wang Shen" began to dissolve operations and delete data, indicating a significant shift in the operational landscape of data scraping in e-commerce [7] - The case aligns with national policies aimed at enhancing data rights protection, as new amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law were introduced to prohibit the improper acquisition and use of legitimate data [8]

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Third Intermediate People's Court has introduced the "Implementation Opinions" to strengthen intellectual property trial work, aiming to support the construction of an international technology innovation center in Shanghai [1][2]. Group 1: Key Measures - The "Implementation Opinions" propose 12 measures and 8 typical cases to enhance the judicial protection of technological innovation achievements, focusing on data rights protection and AI data training [1][2]. - The three main focuses are "protecting achievements, safeguarding entities, and optimizing ecology," with 9 key tasks outlined [2]. Group 2: Judicial Protection - The court aims to provide robust judicial protection for high-innovation inventions and explore punitive compensation rules to deter intellectual property infringement [2][3]. - It emphasizes fair competition by addressing both anti-monopoly and anti-unfair competition issues, while also combating false litigation that hinders technological innovation [2][3]. Group 3: Typical Cases - Eight typical cases were presented, covering key and emerging technology fields such as integrated circuits and biomedicine, providing clear judicial guidance for similar cases [3][4]. - A notable case involved a company suing for unauthorized data acquisition and sale, resulting in a ruling that affirmed the legal protection of data collections and established the dual illegality of the infringing company's actions [4][5]. Group 4: Industry Impact - The court's focus on protecting emerging technologies and incentivizing achievement transformation is seen as a strong legal impetus for technological development in Shanghai [4][5]. - The collaboration between the intellectual property service industry and the court is expected to foster rule innovation and enhance protection, contributing to a fair and transparent innovation ecosystem [5].

Core Viewpoint - The newly revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China, effective from October 15, aims to address new challenges in market competition, particularly in the digital economy, by targeting new forms of unfair competition and enhancing regulatory measures [2][3]. Group 1: New Market Characteristics - The rapid development of platform and sharing economies has led to significant changes in market competition, with data becoming a key element and technologies like algorithms and artificial intelligence being widely applied [2]. - Increased market concentration and scale effects have made it easier for leading platforms to establish dominant market positions, presenting new challenges for anti-unfair competition [2]. Group 2: Key Provisions of the New Law - The law specifically targets false transactions, aiming to dismantle the gray industrial chain of fake reviews and sales, which mislead consumers and create a vicious cycle of poor quality [3]. - It emphasizes the protection of data rights, prohibiting illegal data acquisition and interference with others' data products, thus ensuring safe and regulated data utilization [3][4]. - The law clarifies the responsibilities of platform operators, requiring them to provide a fair competitive environment and not to exploit their advantages to engage in monopolistic practices [4]. Group 3: Implementation Challenges - Effective implementation of the law requires enhanced regulatory enforcement to detect hidden violations, utilizing technologies like big data and artificial intelligence for real-time monitoring [4]. - There is a need for mechanisms that encourage consumers and businesses to assert their rights, addressing the high costs and difficulties associated with legal recourse [5].

Core Viewpoint - The frequent disputes over password code sharing reflect a competition for user relationship data among platforms, highlighting the importance of data protection and utilization in the digital economy [1] Group 1: Password Code Sharing and User Relationship Data - Password codes serve as temporary, one-time strings used for identity verification and access, and can facilitate the transfer of user relationship data between platforms [2][3] - Platforms can induce users to share password codes, which contain special identification information, allowing them to map relationships between users and expand their user networks [3] Group 2: Definition of Personal Information - Personal information is defined as data that can identify a specific individual, including names, contact details, and relationship data [4] - User relationship chains, as a reflection of personal contacts, qualify as personal information under legal definitions [4] Group 3: User Consent and Data Sharing - User sharing of password codes does not equate to informed consent for personal data processing, especially when users are incentivized without clear disclosure of data collection practices [5][6] - The practice of "induced sharing" obscures the true nature of data sharing, leading users to believe they are only sharing activity information rather than personal relationship data [6] Group 4: Competitive Interests in User Relationship Data - Platforms invest significant resources in developing and maintaining user relationship data, which should be recognized as a competitive asset [7] - Induced sharing practices can undermine the economic interests of platforms by allowing competitors to access valuable user relationship data without consent [7] Group 5: Importance of User Relationship Data for New Apps - The necessity for new apps to rely on user relationship data from established platforms raises questions about competitive fairness and the obligation to share such data [8] - User relationship data is a competitive resource that platforms are not obligated to share without user consent [8] Group 6: Industry Practices and Business Ethics - Industry norms do not equate to established business ethics, particularly in emerging sectors where practices are still evolving [9] - The prevalence of password code sharing among platforms may reflect a chaotic phase rather than an accepted ethical standard [9] Group 7: Legal Boundaries of Data Acquisition - The legal framework for data acquisition emphasizes the need for compliance with ethical standards and the protection of proprietary data [10][11] - Unauthorized data scraping can constitute unfair competition, necessitating regulatory oversight to protect data rights [11] Group 8: Tolerance Obligations Among Platforms - While platforms may have a tolerance obligation for link-sharing, this does not permit unrestricted access to user relationship data [12] - Unauthorized sharing of user relationship data through incentivized password code sharing harms both the data-holding platform and user privacy, warranting regulatory intervention [12]

Core Points - The Supreme People's Court of China released its first batch of guiding cases focused on data rights protection, addressing key issues such as data ownership, utilization of data products, personal information protection, and the delivery of online platform accounts [1][3] - A notable case involved a technology company suing a cultural media company for unfair competition due to unauthorized data scraping from its app, resulting in a court ruling that ordered the cultural company to pay 5 million RMB in damages [2] - The guiding cases highlight the increasing number of data-related legal disputes, with the number of such cases doubling from 2021 to 2024, indicating a growing trend in data rights litigation [4] Group 1 - The Supreme People's Court's release of guiding cases marks a significant step in addressing data rights and related legal issues in the digital economy [1][3] - The case of data scraping illustrates the legal complexities surrounding data ownership and the implications for app operators in terms of competition and intellectual property rights [2] - The recent amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, effective from October 15, 2025, will further clarify the legal framework for data rights and unfair competition [3] Group 2 - The rise in data-related legal disputes reflects the broader trend of increased competition among online platforms, leading to more conflicts over data ownership and profit distribution [4] - The court's recognition of user rights in personal information collection emphasizes the importance of consent and transparency in data practices [3][4] - The growing number of cases indicates a need for companies to be more vigilant in their data handling practices to avoid legal repercussions [4]