Internet bans and monopolies the business rules behind the 3Q war

Absrtact: When antitrust three words once again become the global Internet industry focus, perhaps even Bill Gates did not think that the incident happened to switch to China, and the object has changed from Microsoft to Tencent. Tencent's ultimatum to users reflects its

When the three words "antitrust" once again become the focus of the global Internet industry, perhaps even Bill Gates did not think that the incident happened to switch to China, and the object has changed from Microsoft to Tencent.

Tencent's ultimatum to users reflects its confidence in its position. "This is the Financial Times, citing comments from some industry experts in the United States, on the occasion of the two major Chinese internet giants, Tencent and Qihoo 360, for more than two weeks."

The report said consumer rights activists in Beijing filed antitrust lawsuits against Tencent. There are signs that Tencent, the world's third-largest internet company, faces growing opposition in the face of its inability to ignore its influence in the Chinese market. The report even disclosed that Tencent was therefore required to impose a fine of 1.24 billion yuan, equivalent to its 2009-year income of 10%.

In the wake of this, several foreign media outlets in the US, Australia and the U.K. have reprinted the Financial Times's reports in the headlines.

Foreign media attention, let people think of more than 10 years ago, the United States also staged Microsoft to use the market monopoly, software bundled way to kill the browser giant Netscape Battle of life and death.

However, even though it may seem a bit familiar, Microsoft's "software bundle" is dwarfed by the way Tencent has forced users to "choose two".

Although in the Internet industry, both Microsoft and IBM have been or are still trapped in the nightmare of antitrust, but such a blatant challenge, such as Tencent to use rival software users to provide services is "unprecedented."

"(3Q War) such vicious competition and its scope in the civilized world business history unprecedented!" Liu Xingliang, a renowned internet expert, said in an interview with the Daily economic news reporter.

So, has the internet evolved so far that companies have the right to refuse to provide services? What is the significance of these commercial competitions in the form of "unsupported" and "incompatible" forms? Reviewing the monopoly cases that have arisen since the advent of the Internet, the daily economic news tries to decipher the business rules behind the events.

Take history as a mirror

The history of "ban" of internet enterprises

In the internet era, the ban between enterprises can be traced back to the end of last century.

From Microsoft that was the uproar of the lawsuit began, Apple and other giants have been involved in the "ban" or "monopoly" in the whirlpool.

Microsoft kills Netscape

1995, Microsoft founder Bill Gates did two things: first, under the premise of fixed price unchanged, the introduction of WINDOWS95, increased file management, graphics processing, network browsing and other functions, quickly win the market; another is to add a web browsing function to the newly launched WINDOWS95 , but did not develop browser technology, because Gates thought that the fate of the computer is still "window" technology, rather than browser technology.

For the next two years, however, Gates soon realised that he had made a mistake that would make Microsoft go to ruin. It was because of this mistake that a small company called "Netscape" in Silicon Valley saw a glimmer of light in the great Shadow of Microsoft's empire.

For two years, Netscape focused on the development of browser technology. Soon, with the development of technical standards, such as NC and Java, a new software and hardware system, which is based on the internet and has nothing to do with Microsoft, has been formed. For a time, Netscape led the rise of a group of Internet technology companies, quickly constituted a faint and Microsoft can rival the new strength.

For Microsoft, the crisis has formed: if Netscape has a monopoly on the browser market, it is entirely possible and capable of introducing a new operating system to replace Microsoft's Windows.

Next, Gates began negotiations with Netscape, saying that if Netscape did not compete with it, two companies could form a mutually beneficial strategic partnership. However, Netscape is not satisfied with the Microsoft Empire building next to build an attached building, what it wants to do is to replace directly.

As a result, the talks broke down, an internet industry giant hand-to-hand combat "originator of the dispute" on this exchange of fire.

In a short span of a year, Microsoft spent 2 billion of billions of dollars, first quickly introducing browser-product IE2.0 through purchases, mergers, and development, and Gates decided to open it free for the total destruction of Netscape. At that time, the Netscape browser charge of 45 U.S. dollars.

Before Netscape responded, six months later, Gates again resorted to another "killer".

"Microsoft at that time the means is far away from Tencent, in fact, is to use the monopoly of Windows, to users bundled with IE, so that IE came from behind, more than Netscape." "Speech and the 90 's war, the domestic Internet veteran Chisiao this description."

"You have the right to use IE, you can choose Netscape." But for this matter, when Microsoft in the United States played a big lawsuit, the U.S. antitrust law to split Microsoft. "Chisiao said.

In 2001, the United States Columbia, Dist. Of federal appeals court dismissed the Local Court law's decision to split Microsoft into a sentence, but still upheld the "Microsoft engaged in anti-competitive business practices that violate antitrust laws". Microsoft has been convicted of using monopoly power in the operating system market to crack down on rivals, and it is illegal to sign some exclusive contracts with computer manufacturers and software developers.

The battle between Apple and Adobe

History is always strikingly similar. 10 years later, just a few months ago, still in the United States, Apple founder Jobs published an open letter about Flash, directed at Adobe, the owner of Flash software, which has been "in support of entanglement" with Apple for years.

In the letter, jobs listed all the reasons Apple had decided not to allow the ipad, iphone and ipod to support Flash, pointing out that Adobe's two-dimensional vector animation software Flash has problems with security.

Adobe is not showing any weakness. In response, Adobe launched a new campaign to counter Apple's "ban" on its flash products.

"We like apples," Adobe said in an online ad. What we do not like is to imprison your free choice, and you should be free to choose what you create, how you create it, and what you experience on the Web. At the same time, Adobe bought a full-page version of The Washington Post, detailing the dispute between Adobe and Apple.

The US Department of Justice and the Federal trade may be investigating the flash dispute between Apple and Adobe, but the "commercial war" has not yet been turned out, although people familiar with the matter have already said it. Meanwhile, the New York Times broke news from Microsoft CEO Ballmer mihui Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayan. Two people are said to be discussing the issue with the joint fight against Apple, one of the options is Microsoft's acquisition of Adobe.

On the above rumors, some insiders said, in fact, a few years ago, there is news that Microsoft intends to acquire Adobe Company, it is because of fear of the antitrust investigation, only to be abandoned.

IBM has been "antitrust"

In fact, the history of antitrust in the United States, far more than Microsoft and several other names.

IBM's Blue Giant's plight is more embarrassing than Microsoft's. Although for decades in all technical fields, from CPU to Office software, has been quietly doing the work, but it seems that from its establishment of market position from the day, IBM has been "antitrust" shadow shrouded.

"In fact, the earliest case of antitrust comes from IBM. In 1969, the government sued IBM monopolies, and IBM was forced to separate the software from the hardware. Liu Xingliang told reporters.

Not so long ago, IBM was once again subjected to complaints from French software company Turbohercules and large U.S. computer maker T3 that IBM bundled its mainframe products with large computer software to crack down on rivals.

In this connection, the European Commission announced on the same day that the European Commission would launch two antitrust investigations into the company, as IBM was suspected of abusing its dominance in the mainframe market. The extension of the second survey, initiated by the European Commission, is designed to investigate whether IBM has discriminatory practices against mainframe maintenance providers, including restricting or delaying the provision of exclusive IBM-owned spare parts.

"It market competition is fierce, every one of the companies to seize the monopoly status of the battle, through the rough." "Talk about the nightmare and tangle of Monopoly enterprise, Liu Xingliang such summary."

Monopoly approach

Imitation or integration of the leader key in the control of innovation?

As an industry leader, how should "peace" withstand rival attacks while retaining its advantages?

Tencent's "rogue" action is a question: in the Internet age, is not as long as the relative strength of the Giants can be "not supported" "incompatible" way to kill its competitors?

Tencent by imitation?

"The most glamorous place in the industry is innovation. Xingdong, the co-founder and chairman of the Internet labs, bloggers China and Yiwu Global network, said in an interview with the Daily economic news reporter. He said that no empire can exist forever, this is an objective law. In a healthy entrepreneurial environment, it is possible to appear Facebook, only to appear Twitter.

Previously, according to the statistics on the Internet, regardless of 360 and Tencent who is wrong, Tencent seems to have become the Internet domain many enterprises public enemy. Industry insiders generally say, the reason is in the development process of Tencent not only lack of innovation, even in the wantonly "cottage."

Tencent uses its market position in IM, or monopolistic status, to replicate the success of others in every field. As long as a small company in a field of innovation, it quickly imitated, from behind. Tencent has made enemies in the Internet industry because it tries to squeeze 360 off in the same way in the security sector, which leads to 360 against him and 360 of the people who say so. Xiaodong said in an interview with a network media.

Sohu's founder, chairman and chief Executive Officer Charles Zhang on his microblog on Tencent's accusations more acute: "Tencent to plagiarism and monopoly for the company, and the two to achieve the ultimate, the result is that the innovation is not protected, small companies can not survive." ”

Microsoft relies on integration?

Is Tencent really so miserable? Plagiarism and Monopoly is only the biggest problem of China's internet industry development? In fact, such problems occur in the United States and at Microsoft.

The computer industry in the United States has often criticized Microsoft for not inventing anything new – Microsoft's startup technology-MS-DOS system was bought by other companies; windows, which has made a huge profit for Microsoft, is similar to Apple's products; Microsoft's Word and office are not original technologies, Companies such as Lotus have developed similar systems a few years earlier than Microsoft, and Microsoft is a stalker of Netscape in the browser market.

But it is clear that in the Gates ' Dictionary of decision making, the leader's ability to develop their own technology does not reflect frequent innovation. So what is Microsoft doing to keep its edge?

Bill Gates has made it very clear that Microsoft's core business tenet is to listen to the demands of users, to trust in technologies that improve people's quality of life, to work closely with other companies that have a consensus on the production of cheap and affordable goods, and to strive to continuously introduce innovative products.

Bill Gates conveys the idea that Microsoft advocates a market-oriented technology innovation strategy, and that technology innovation is open and resource-integrated. Between the market, rivals and consumers, Microsoft has created a tension of innovation space, Microsoft is not the inventor of technology, but the technology of the "market integrator."

Take Microsoft, Netscape's "originator of the dispute" as an example, we can see that Microsoft's competitive strategy is basically based on "resource integration"-the proposed cooperation with Netscape, is the hope that through the replacement of resources to resolve the confrontation head-on, the move failed, and in an integrated manner quickly developed IE browser. And in the market promotion, the implementation is at that time let a person jaw-dropping free strategy; As a strong final blow, IE and Windows bundled sales, but also to Microsoft monopoly market ability of a full play.

"Microsoft has not tried to develop a product that is better than the Netscape browser, but it may be the genius of Bill Gates," he said. Perhaps in his view, the industry leader's independent technology development capability is not reflected in the product innovation, but reflected in the market of this innovative control. "Robert Kallan, a professor at Harvard Business School, explains the daily economic news."

So is Tencent using "creative control" to explain what it's doing, in the name of "step in the footsteps of Microsoft"?

"We need to see the end of things. Tencent's approach is to abuse its dominant position, threatening users to make choices, which is a malicious monopolistic behavior. Tencent unilaterally suspended the service of 360 software users is unfair competition, but also to the user's right to know, the right to choose, uninstall rights, privacy disregard. "Xingdong (blog) to the daily economic news reporter said.

Business Rules

To support or restrain the strong and strong and strong and weak in China and America

As history has taught us, the business operations of many giants, including Microsoft, are fraught with difficulties in overseas business and legal systems.

Zhang, for example, "When Microsoft imitated Apple to invent mouse, was fined hundreds of millions of dollars;" The founder of Facebook, Markzukenberg, had listened to his classmate's idea of building a Harvard campus contact network at the beginning of his business, and was accused of plagiarism, and was sentenced to 65 million dollars for his classmate; &t was dumped by the U.S. Department of Justice for a monopoly. Microsoft's operating system monopoly is closely monitored by the public and the judiciary, without limiting any presence of Microsoft's competitive products in Windows ... "and in China, no company has ever suffered such" doom ".

Why is America so sensitive to antitrust? Xiaodong's understanding is that "because the core of American business civilization is that innovation comes from small and medium-sized enterprises, the government should curb large companies ' use of market position to influence small companies, thus guaranteeing competition and equal opportunities." ”

However, Xiaodong also pointed out that, compared with the United States, the concept and practice of Chinese enterprises is not to encourage competition, but to encourage "big, constant, strong and strong." "If Microsoft is in China, China is eager to have international companies to honor the face, so will support him." So when Chinese companies reach a scale, they will get more resources and more concessions than SMEs. ”

At the same time, Zhang also said that it is because of the maturity of the United States law, the U.S. High-tech industry has been 60 years of innovation and vitality. "And in China, innovation is not enough to protect, small companies are not easy to survive, can only exclaiming." ”

So, the current domestic Internet industry game rules how to decide, and who should decide?

When journalists throw out these questions, even senior experts have a hard time giving a clear answer. However, the rules are only rules, in most people's opinion, can really work out the most market and the interests of the parties to the rules, but also the market participants.

"I hope that this business rule and the rules of the game are shared by the private, the Internet users and the Internet industry practitioners and the government," he said. "Xiaodong said.

On the other hand, it is also crucial that companies and practitioners in the industry, especially those with a "monopoly status", be able to lead, in addition to the hard rules of the game.

"When you don't become the boss of the industry, you have to fight with others, this is understandable." However, when you get to a certain position, when you are the biggest player in the industry, you have the responsibility to maintain the entire industry, there should be moral constraints. "Liu Xingliang (blogger) said to the daily economic news reporter.

According to Liu Xingliang explained, to 600 million active users to become the world's largest instant messenger Tencent QQ, and the general industry in any software or program has a clear distinction, that is, binding the user's "social relations." "The nature of QQ determines that if its users switch or change their use, they will pay a much higher price and cost than other common products." ”

Liu Xingliang that, as Tencent, should understand their own to the user's irreplaceable, and the use of this can not replace the threat of user practices, industry and public opinion is the key to condemnation.

Solution

"Anti-monopoly law" or difficult to rule 3Q dispute split Tencent few impossible

If Tencent is suspected of monopoly, is there any law to "antitrust" it?

In an interview with the Daily Economic news reporter, jurists and lawyers are almost identical: in this "3Q dispute", Tencent's abuse of market dominance to restrict competition is indeed suspected of violating our anti-monopoly law. But experts also predict that the possibility of a judicial solution to the dispute is slim.

The first question is the anti-monopoly law itself and its applicability.

"This procedure is too complex to be based on the anti-monopoly law," he said. Market share is not the determining factor of monopoly, but also the difficulty of market entry. "Han Lu law firm chairman once told the Daily economic news reporter," China's 2008 years before the implementation of the "anti-monopoly Law", compared with foreign countries can only be considered a "rule", "use it to determine such a complex business case, the operability is very small." ”

"Anti-monopoly Law" research expert Mao also stressed that in the Internet industry in a survey, 50% of users choose to "uninstall QQ" The fact also shows that consumers have the possibility of choice, so "3Q dispute" can not apply the "anti-monopoly law" is still a problem.

Second, the law enforcement should not intervene, how to intervene to become another focus.

Wu Hongwei, a professor of law school at Renmin University of China, points out that there are "three carriages" in the implementation of the anti-monopoly law--mofcom, SAIC, NDRC, which can lead to coordination disadvantage and slow response.

However, senior analyst Chen Wan of Software and information Services research at the Ministry of Electronic Science and Technology Information Institute has a different view from the experts. In his view, the incident should be seen as a purely judicial event, to be resolved by the market itself.

On the basis of the "3Q War" in the access to justice of the various problems and questions, there are previous experts suggested that the social relationship defined as a public product, through the government-led, the mandatory realization of the interoperability between the IM interconnection, that is, to try foreign "split" means, Tencent will be split into Tencent Network (qq.com) and QQ two parts, the former focus on the network content, the latter focus on instant messaging, effectively break the monopoly.

But such advice is considered an armchair.

"First of all, Tencent business between most of the strong adhesion, and QQ itself is just an IM software, no profitability, how to split?" Secondly, there is no monopoly between Tencent's game business and the portal, and there is no need to split up. Liu Xingliang said to the daily economic news reporter.

As for the Chinese, even the world's unprecedented internet business will end, Xiaodong that there are several outcomes: "The first is the government to solve; the second is nothing, no one unloaded who, the incident suddenly ended in a sort of a half-baked way, and the third one killed the other side, Tencent is generally killed 360 of the probability of a big point, four is 360 pull down Tencent, the probability is smaller. ”

Xiaodong added, "the latter two possible probabilities are relatively small, the first two possible is I do not want to happen, the second possibility is greater." ”