Research On The Rights Of Market Entities Serving The Natural Ranking Of Search Engines

The Renren&Baidu Case is China's first test of its Antitrust law in the Internet field.All legal research on this case is based on the Antitrust Law,and many scholars have advocated the introduction of two-sided markets theory for more accurately defining the relevant market.However,for resolving the dispute in the case,first,it shall be considered within the framework of the legal relationship of the natural ranking service market,and then consider the application of the Anti-Monopoly Law as well as two-sided markets theory,from the perspective of the connection between the natural ranking service market and the bidding ranking service market.This paper aims to build an analysis framework based on the rights of market participants in the natural ranking service,and judge whether the rights and interests of Renren Company are infringed*providing a new met&od for studying the case.The natural ranking service market mainly has the following characteristics:the natural ra]king service market is a market with three parties involved;the search engine serves as an information coordinator between website owners and users;the website owner follows the principle of promoting the free flow of information when setting up the robot.t?ct.The natural ranking service market is a free market.The normative system in this market is the direct source of market participants' right,including legal principles,industry regulations,legal norms,and contractual agreements.On the basis of the accurate xmderstanding of market characteristics and normative system,this paper analyzes the specific rights enjoyed by the natural ranking service market participants,focusing on the legal relationship between website owners and search engines,and the rights enjoyed by each party.The search engine is entitled to formulate and enforce the algorithm rules,while the website owner has the right to use natural ranking service,to request the other party to enforce the algorithm rules fairly,and to request the other party to adjust the ranking results only according to the algorithm rules,meaning that algorithm rules shall be the sole reason for search engines to adjusting natural ranking results.In this case,Renren Company has two main claims.First,Baidu implemented a comprehensive screening against Quanmin Medical Network;Second,the reduction in the amount of bidding ranking is the reason for Baidu's comprehensive screening,the essence of which is manual intervention.Renren Company is entitled to request Baidu to enforce algorithm rules fairly and adjust natural ranking results only according to algorithm rules.Baidu's claim is that Baidu only reduced the natural rankings of the websites within the original domain name of Quanmin Medical Network;the garbage chains caused Baidu to implement measures to reduce its natural rankings.Since Baidu has the right to enforce its own algorithm rules,these measures serve as a punishment.Finally,the core disputes in this case are summarized and discussed.First,whether Baidu has implemented a comprehensive screening on Quanmin Medical Network.Baidu did reduce natural ranking results of the original domain name of Quanmin Medical Network,but did not include the new domain name of Quanmin Medical Network from the first beginning;Secondj Baidu's behavior is actually a pxmishment or manual intervention.Although Renren Company cannot prove that Baidu has implemented manual intervention,whether the garbage chain can become Baidu's justification for its penalty should also be discussed based on various assumptions.If the garbage chain of Quanmin Medical Network reaches the setting standard of the punishment measures within the anti-chain cheating mechanism,Baidu's behavior shoidd be recognized as a punishment.Otherwise,it shall be viewed as manual intervention.