Recognization Of Internet Ad-blocking's Iegitimacy

In recent years,there have been frequent cases of online advertising blocking,such as“Cheetah Browser case”,“i QIYI v.‘Ji Lu You'”and“i QIYI v.‘VST Quan Ju He software'”and other classic cases,which have caused wide discussion from all circles.In judicial practice,the courts almost always apply general provisions to regulate the online advertising blocking behavior,believing that the behavior infringes the business model of the operator or the commercial interests behind the business model,violates the principle of good faith and business ethics,so the behavior constitutes unfair competition.However,there are many problems in the court's determination of the illegitimacy of this behavior.First,the court protects the interests of operators too much and blindly protects the business model of "free content + advertising" and commercial interests.In this way,the court not only ignores the interests of competitors and consumers,but also violates the nature of market competition and the purpose of encouraging competition of anti-unfair competition.Secondly,the court adopts the general thinking mode of tort to determine that the online advertising blocking behavior is illegal,and does not determine whether the behavior is legitimate or not based on the nature of the behavior itself,which is inconsistent with the nature of the anti-unfair competition law as a behavior regulation law.Finally,the principle of "no interference without public benefit" is widely used in the trial of online advertising blocking cases.However,this principle is only an extension of the thinking of rights protection,and it also has problems of hindering competition,"presumption of guilt" and inversion of burden of proof.In contrast,in the judicial practice of the United States and Germany,the concepts of valuing the interests of operators and competitors,protecting the interests of consumers and prudently intervening in market competition are all worthy of our reference.The new anti-unfair competition law adds "Internet clauses" on the original basis,and some scholars expect that "Internet clauses" can become the role of the sword holder in the case of online advertising blocking,and make up for the deficiencies and defects of the previous judicial practice.However,according to the author's analysis,there are certain challenges and limitations in applying "Internet terms" to regulate this type of cases,so the general terms should still be applied in determining the online advertising blocking behavior.The author thinks that,under the above situation,combined with the new method of formation of the interests of consumers,operators and social and public interests of multiple protection mode,as well as the reference of the United States and Germany the judicial practice,should be the applicable general terms and conditions on the basis of introducing the theory of interest measurement,after the comprehensive measure of the interests of all parties,to determine the legality of online advertising shielding behavior again.This paper mainly adopts case analysis,literature analysis and comparative analysis.By combing and analyzing the case judgment thoughts and consulting the literature materials related to the online advertising shielding behavior,this paper discusses the deficiencies in the online advertising shielding cases in China.At the same time,this paper analyzes and USES for reference the foreign judicial practice of online advertising blocking,and hopes that the court can determine whether the behavior violates the principle of good faith and business ethics from the perspective of interest measurement in combination with the purpose of protecting multiple interests of the new anti-law,so as to determine whether the behavior constitutes unfair competition.