Study Of Unfair Competition Liability Of Browser Blocking Video Advertisements

At present,there is still controversy about the unjustifiability of browsers blocking video ads.In the relevant cases,the court’s determination of the illegality of the blocking is mainly based on whether the blocking violates specified in Paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the Law.According to the existing cases,business ethics is usually understood as industry norms,the subjective intentions of the actor and business management “non-interference” and other criteria.Industry norms generally refer to the general practice of the industry.However,in the field of Internet,it is not yet known whether the general practice recognized by market participants has been formed.Secondly,the examination of the subjective state of the actor is contrary to the standard of rational economic man.The standard of rational economic man does not require the enterprises to protect the interests of other operators or pursue public interest in the process of operation.Giving too much weight to the actor’s subjective state will unduly increase the operator’s duty of care.The abstract standard of business ethics as a criterion for judging the impropriety of competitive behavior may also have jurisprudential defects.Besides,the legitimate rights and interests of other operators should not be narrowly understood as the loss of business interests.The long-term interests of consumers,which are based on preconceptions of static market competition,are contrary to the dynamic nature of market competition and should not be included in the scope of unfair competition.The main content of the second chapter is the framework of unfair competition of browser blocking video advertisement behavior.Unfair competition is the type of“unfair” competition.If there is no competition,there is no unfair competition.Therefore,the first level of the unfair competition framework is the existence of competitive behavior.Due to the blurring of market boundaries,the narrow sense of competition will limit the scope of competitive behavior.Competitive behavior should be an act of competing for trading opportunities or seeking competitive advantage.The criterion for the unfairness of competitive behavior lies in whether the competitive behavior implemented by the operator causes damage to the competitive order of the market,whether it is in line with the dynamic and neutral view of competition,and whether it is oriented to the value of efficiency.Anti-unfair competition law is a market behavior law,and the paradigm of right infringement should not be confused with the paradigm of behavior that damages the competitive order of the market.Secondly,the competition itself involves multiple subjects in the market,and the process of determining the unfairness of competition should be the process of measuring the interests of multiple market subjects.Specifically,whether the competitive behavior is detrimental to the interests of free competition of operators,free decision-making interests of consumers,and the public interest of society.The method of weighing interests provides an effective and feasible solution for the application of the standard of damaging competition order,thus forming a two-stage framework of “competition behavior-competition dagame”.Firstly,the existence of competitive behavior is judged,and secondly,whether the competitive behavior is unjustified by the method of interest measurement.The third chapter refers to the “Window of the World” case and presupposes a case in which a browser blocks video advertisement.The browser operator’s behavior did not harm the free competition interests of the video website.Video sites can still return to their original business model and operation activities with the help of technical means.The interests of free competition of video websites were not affected.According to the analysis framework of “competitive behavior-competitive damage”,the browser operator’s behavior neither damages the operator’s free competition interests,nor excludes consumers’ right of choice and public interests,and does not constitute unfair competition.