The Internet Industry "abuse" Regulation Of New Ideas

The Internet has become a part of our life, study and work as an indispensable a pplication tool. Network is popular with the rapid development of network economy a nd its development speed is far beyond the entity economy driving the development of China’s economy. Before 2003, China Internet economy was in the period that several major portals competed with each other and the Internet market competition was suffici ent; but after the development of nearly ten years, the field of Internet began to appea r the phenomenon of monopoly putting forward new challenges to China’s "anti-monopo ly law". In 2010,the case " Qihoo v. Tencent abusing of dominant market position " is C hina’s largest-ever network war in Internet industry and hundreds of millions of Internetusers are forced to get involved in the protracted dispute. The domestic "Internet first antitrust case" lasted for more than four years and finally sunset under the curtain in2014, October 16. This is the first Internet anti-trust case heared by the Supreme Co urt since the "anti-monopoly law" has promulgated 7 years, triggering the industry, use rs and the legal profession new thoughts about the antitrust laws in the Internet field.This paper is to explore the effective method of Internet monopoly regulation from the perspective of reversal thinking and recommend the most appropriate Internet antitrust cases Solutions in the development of existing theories.This article excepting the introduction and conclusion, mainly consists of the follo wing four parts:Part I: Theoretical basis Monopoly Regulation and its historical evolution. Throug h the overview of the historical development, the influence of the theory of antitrust p olicy and other aspects of the deficiencies of harvard school, Chicago school and the new industrial organization theory, it sorts out all the positive factors in the existing s chool antitrust theories which can be applied to the field of Internet antitrust to maketheoretical preparation for the later presented new ideas.Part II: The particularity of the Internet industry and monopoly. Firstly, it fully dis cussed with the particularity of the Internet industry on the basis of comparison with traditional monopoly industry,analyzed and made out the particularity of the monopol y of the Internet. And it illustrates that the current "anti-monopoly law" and the tradit ional industry of monopoly regulation method won’t work in the field of the Internet and need a new regulation method and train of thought.Part III: The Internet monopoly regulation of new ideas: return from behaviorism to structuralism. In the proposed new ideas in this paper from the back to the deconstr uction of behaviorism, while the pros and cons of this article discusses the rationality of new ideas. First of all,it notes from the anti side that " behaviorism " monopol y is in the regulation of the Internet’s existence predicament; and then discusses the r ationality and necessity of the Internet domain structure of the regulation from three asp ects.Part IV: The practice of the Internet in the structuralism monopoly regulation : t he Qihoo v. Tencent monopoly Case. This part analyzed the defects of final judgmen t in the Qihoo v. Tencent monopoly case,with the specific case, analyzed the way th at the Internet monopoly "structuralism" regulation is reasonable; And on this basis, pr oposed a new Internet antitrust specific measures to make up for the shortage of stru cturalism. All these views make that the argument of this article and demonstration ar e more reasonable.