technology news November 18th news, Sogou company v. Qihoo 360 unfair competition case in the Beijing intellectual property court verdict, the court of second instance that Sogou browser user information leak the content is true, but the publicity behavior of 360 constitute unfair competition, a sentence of 360 to 100 thousand yuan for sogou.
, a "pop" Sogou 360 war
360 lawsuit pinch: May lawsuit to tug of war
In the case of
due to the November 2013, 360 companies found that Sogou browser vulnerabilities related to the users of Alipay, bank accounts and other information. 360 through 360 security guards, micro-blog official 360 security guards pop news means this news was spread.
subsequently launched a lawsuit against 360 companies, said the company’s reputation to slander the browser Sogou 360.
in February 5th of this year, Beijing City People’s Court of first instance verdict in Haidian District. Haidian District people’s court that the Qihoo did not prove the existence of loopholes, the necessary information released to the public behavior over the prompt risk, constitute defamation of goodwill, ordered the company to stop the behavior of Qihoo, to eliminate the effects of compensation for 300 thousand yuan.
court also found that 360 of other people’s products, services, comments or criticism, there is misleading the public, damage to goodwill behavior. 360 as a security vendor, one can not provide loopholes in the test results, the two can not provide any solution to fix the vulnerability, so the court found that there is no so-called Sogou browser loopholes in the content of the 360.
in addition, 360 of other people’s products, services, comments or criticism, there is misleading the public, damage to goodwill behavior. 360 more than necessary to the relevant public prompt risk, for malicious smear competition act. In summary, the court found that 360 of products have a negative impact on Sogou reputation judgment 360, constitute unfair competition.
in the final judgment, the court of first instance of intellectual property in Beijing than there are two main changes: one is that Sogou browser at the time of the incident, there is a leak of user information content is true, the evidence provided by the company 360; two is the penalty amount to 100 thousand yuan.
in the two instance verdict, Beijing intellectual property court said that "through the relevant procedures, the operator can obtain the Sogou browser login website URL, username and password, this evidence can prove that this version of Sogou browser has leaked user information that is in use." The court stressed that the operation was done using the notary’s computer, under the witness’s testimony.
for the amount of 100 thousand yuan penalty, the court said that because there is no evidence that the 360 through unfair unfair interests obtained by the amount of competition, the discretion of the court to determine the amount of compensation, not full support for Sogou claim. (Liu Can)