Previous business/academic article Next business/academic article
Academic Articles Awards > Asian Antitrust

Qihoo versus Tencent: Roadmap or Anomaly

Nate Bush, Lining Shan, and Ning Qiao, Antitrust, Vol. 29, Issue 2, pp. 54-61, Spring 2015

See Nathan G. Bush's resume See Lining Shan's resume See Ning Qiao's resume

But when China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued its first decision under the AML on October 8, 2014, it faced a showdown between two homegrown private-sector Internet giants: Tencent and Qihoo. The SPC upheld the March 2013 decision by the Guangdong Higher People’s Court rejecting Qihoo’s claims that Tencent had violated the AML rules against abuse of dominance by rendering its “QQ” instant messaging (IM) service incompatible with Qihoo’s security software and by bundling new application manager software with IM software upgrades. The SPC articulated a flexible approach to abuse of dominance claims, focusing on actual market dynamics rather than market shares in gauging dominance and on the actual competitive effects rather than the form of the challenged conduct in defining abuse. But while this outcome may be welcomed by multinationals fearing future abuse of dominance claims in China, it remains to be seen how far the SPC’s effects-based approach will extend to future investigations and litigation.

Download our brochure