Without a sound anti-monopoly law, the Internet will never be peaceful.

——

Everyone knows that "any businessman will not joke about the interests of his customers, let alone sacrifice the interests of the public for the so-called competition, because they all know that customers are the parents who support his survival and development!" Because the market economy is also an economy ruled by law, and it is an honest and moral economy, the trinity is indispensable, especially for large enterprises like Tencent, which bear social responsibilities and moral obligations. I believe Ma understands this truth. I believe his business acumen and IQ should not be low. Tencent will not kidnap hundreds of millions of netizens for self-destruction. He will not joke about Tencent and his own interests. He must have his own reasons for doing so. This is one of his business decisions under the existing legal background. Of course, whether this decision is correct still needs the test and judgment of the market. If a major business decision is not good, it is risky. Therefore, before doing so, it is common sense to make a good assessment of business risks and litigation risks. Once there is a mistake, it may bring harm to the interests of enterprises and even lead to bankruptcy of enterprises. Of course, if Tencent must commit suicide, it is also his right, because it is impossible for any country's laws to prohibit suicide, only homicide, suicide is human freedom. Therefore, the author only makes a rational analysis of this dispute from the legal level:

First of all, if Tencent has a contract with hundreds of millions of netizens to provide unconditional free QQ services for netizens, it will not prevent QQ users from using "buttoned bodyguards". If so, Tencent cannot unilaterally set conditions for this without the consent of netizens, otherwise it will be a breach of contract. In other words, Tencent forced netizens to make an exclusive choice between using QQ and 360 "buttoning bodyguards", which is a breach of contract and an act of kidnapping and forcing netizens; If not, the mandatory condition for Tencent to set users to uninstall "buttoned bodyguards" and use QQ is that it is not prohibited by law (unless there is a prohibition in China's anti-monopoly law, according to the author's ignorance, it is not), then the business activities that are not prohibited by law are feasible, that is to say, legal. Further explanation: suppose that one day the market has changed a lot, and the situation has changed. Tencent can't make a profit and lose money when operating QQ tools. Tencent told netizens to cancel Tencent's QQ instant messaging service, which is also Tencent's commercial freedom. Should I leave the headquarters? We can't ask Tencent to operate at a loss until he is insolvent and can't file for bankruptcy and die. Ma has to continue to provide free QQ service for hundreds of millions of netizens forever. It is said that QQ is copied and imitated by foreign instant messaging software ICQ. At that time, ICQ also had many users. Now that ICQ is dead, his users can no longer use ICQ. ICQ netizens can't say that you can't die. Your death has brought inconvenience to my chat and infringed on my users' rights. Now QQ is not dead, just because of the commercial war, it has set a condition for netizens not to use "buttoning bodyguards", because Tencent also has its own software "QQ doctor" and "QQ housekeeper", which can clean up lengthy junk files and prevent QQ settings from being maliciously modified.

Secondly, both "buttoning bodyguard" and "QQ housekeeper" should scan the user's hard disk and privacy. In order to realize the above functions of "QQ doctor" or "QQ housekeeper", "QQ bodyguard" must also scan the user's hard disk, so who can guarantee that "QQ bodyguard" and 360 antivirus will not scan the QQ user's hard disk and privacy? In order to kill virus, kill virus, kill horses in Troy, and prevent horses in Troy, it is inevitable to scan netizens' hard disks. There are too many Trojans and viruses now, almost everywhere. If we want to use the network and QQ, we must accept the reality of being scanned, otherwise our system will face the risk of being attacked by viruses at any time, which will lead to the collapse of the system and the inability to access the Internet. Our QQ account and personal information such as photos, diaries, friends, other accounts and mobile phone numbers may also be available at any time. If we are afraid of scanning, we have to stop surfing the internet.

Thirdly, scanning the user's hard disk and privacy is different from revealing and selling the user's privacy. If Tencent scans the privacy of QQ users and reveals it, or uses it to sell money, if there is evidence, it will infringe on the privacy of others. The infringed netizen can file a civil lawsuit against Tencent, demanding to stop the infringement and compensate the economic loss and mental loss caused by the infringement of the netizen's privacy. Our mobile phone number is known by China Mobile and China Unicom, so we can't say they shouldn't know it, can we? However, if China Mobile and China Unicom or their staff disclose our mobile phone numbers and communication records and sell them for profit, it will constitute infringement on us, and we can sue them.

Fourthly, the "self-selection" function provided by "buttoning bodyguards" to QQ users to intercept and filter QQ software advertisements and delete QQ plug-ins has seriously violated Tencent's commercial rights and interests. Tencent and 360 are both businessmen and companies doing business. Tencent provides a series of QQ-based instant messaging services for netizens, which are mainly free. This is not a social welfare undertaking, but a profitable undertaking. How to make a profit is advertising revenue, including various forms of advertising links, so as to charge advertisers advertising fees, which is the same as TV spots. If TV viewers don't want to watch advertisements, they can only watch pay TV without advertisements or buy DVDs at their own expense. So Tencent also has a fee-based service. If you don't want to see the advertisement of Tencent QQ, you have to spend money to buy all kinds of "red, orange, yellow, green, blue and purple" diamonds from him. 360 launched free antivirus this year, repelling all kinds of paid antivirus software. 360 did not learn from Lei Feng, "serving netizens wholeheartedly". After he occupied the personal user antivirus software market, he made money by advertising and changed the way of making money. There is no free lunch in the world, and 360 is not doing social welfare. Otherwise, what will the whole family of 360 Company eat? 360 provides QQ advertising filtering software for QQ users to "choose to use", which is actually forcing Tencent to quit the instant chat market, which is the same as 360 forcing other paid antivirus software to quit the personal antivirus software market. As a QQ user, I will certainly use the software to filter QQ advertisements, because it is convenient and equivalent to enjoying the previous "red, yellow, green, blue and purple" diamond treatment for free. How nice! -Everyone is greedy. If there is a free lunch, who doesn't want to eat it? But in this way, we were lured by 360 and unconsciously "conspired" to stop QQ from publishing advertisements to make money. 360 successfully used us to break Tencent's financial path: only users are allowed to provide services, and he is not allowed to make money by advertising! Tencent's commercial interests will be deprived and lost, and 360 will constitute a serious infringement. Tencent can only be forced to fight back and there is no way out.

Fifth, filtering QQ advertisements by free QQ users also constitutes infringement on Tencent. There is no truly free service in the market, unless it is charity, participation in social welfare undertakings, or government social security services (which are also paid by taxpayers). Businessmen and commercial companies doing charity is just a way to give back to society and return profits. The premise is that he wants profits and surplus property. I have never seen any businessman or company do charity to bankrupt themselves and donate all their money and property, because it is against human nature. Bill Gates donated tens of billions, but he didn't donate all. He can also ensure that his existing quality of life will not decline. There is no real absolute "naked donation" in this world-donating to yourself without clothes, donating to your wife and children, employees without meals, and donating to yourself without wages. Why donate? This is related to society, corporate culture, legal system design and personal moral value orientation: I only need to spend that much money. Compared with my psychological and spiritual needs, I am willing to donate it in exchange for spiritual gain and balance. Even if Lei Feng did good deeds, he felt very happy, and no one forced him to do so. A few years ago, the European Union sued Microsoft for monopoly and demanded that Microsoft be split. Bill Gates didn't say, so let's split up. Anyway, I have more money than I can spend-the market is not such a logic. Bill Gates is responsible for his reputation, status and employees' interests, so he paid a lawyer to answer the lawsuit and finally won-otherwise, would he have so much money to donate now? Donation is a kind of social responsibility and moral obligation that the big bosses of big companies and enterprises take the initiative to undertake. It is not a legal responsibility, and it is ok not to donate. "Forced donation" and "donated" are not donations, otherwise it will not be a free society with autonomy and freedom of contract. Moreover, the premise of donation is to make money, not to make money, where to donate? -Unless you die immediately, donate organs! Therefore, it is also our obligation and responsibility to Tencent to use QQ for free without stopping QQ advertisements from popping up. Otherwise, we will pay for the charged "red, orange, yellow, green, blue and purple" diamond QQ, because we can't deprive Tencent of the opportunity to obtain legitimate commercial benefits from advertising revenue; It cannot be said that the interests of hundreds of millions of netizens who use QQ are social public interests and national interests, so they can deprive Tencent's legal person interests and Ma's personal interests on behalf of the country and the people. In order to protect the interests of the country and the public, we should also protect the personal interests of Tencent and Ma. If Tencent's corporate interests and Ma's personal interests can be "represented" and deprived by 360 "representing" hundreds of millions of netizens, then the personal interests of each of our netizens can also be deprived and represented in the name of the interests of the country and the vast majority of people. This is the logic of losing lips and teeth.

Sixth, netizens have been kidnapped twice by 360. The first time I was kidnapped by 360 and used 360' s free anti-virus software, this kidnapping was very hidden and did not cause such a big storm, because those vendors who uninstalled the paid software were not as powerful as Tencent, and they were relatively weak in the Internet, making little noise and having no "anti-kidnapping" ability. So we successfully uninstalled paid antivirus software such as Rising and Jinshan, and installed and used 360 free antivirus software. Although it felt good at first, it felt like "turning over and liberating" after hard work. But when the paid antivirus software is repelled, now more and more 360 advertisements must be seen; If 360 doesn't advertise now and give us anti-virus for free, he will also go bankrupt. Now 360 extrapolates, kidnapping us and using "buttoned bodyguards" to prevent us from watching QQ advertisements. We also feel very good and feel that we are "more liberated" again, so we think that 360 is the savior of hundreds of millions of netizens, but Tencent is so powerful that it is "anti-kidnapping", so many of us stand on 360' s side, cheer for 360 and "willingly". How can we be so irrational? When QQ is repelled, 360 will launch (it is said that it has already launched) IM instant chat software. If it is launched, naturally, there will be no pop-up advertisements before repelling QQ at first, and 360 will also let us live a quiet and happy life for a few days without advertising pop-ups, because the advertising revenue of 360 with anti-virus software continues to provide support to compete with Tencent to fight the war of attrition, while Tencent QQ only has QQ advertisements as its main source of income, and now it has been cut off and there is no food and grass. Tencent is unlikely to develop free antivirus software to seize 360' s market and advertising revenue resources. The three armed forces have not moved, and the grain and grass are cut off. There is no doubt that they will be defeated-this is the wishful thinking of 360, and it is also its "great talent" to dominate the Internet world: Tencent is now strong, but 360 has the possibility of unifying the Internet world. When QQ was repelled, 360 unified the Internet personal antivirus and IM instant chat market, and 360' s IM would definitely advertise, even more ... At that time, we could only be at the mercy of 360, and we didn't know what 360 would do to hundreds of millions of netizens. Maybe it's not impossible to organize a "hearing" and then charge us for instant chat! Because 360 always wants to maximize its own interests after monopolizing the market, this is the essence and harm of monopoly capital, which has nothing to do with personal morality! So we have to give in to it, submit to humiliation, and hundreds of millions of netizens can only hope on "36 1" to save us-hundreds of millions of netizens will always be in a saved weak position and can't really stand up-this is the "periodic law" of the Internet society. After being kidnapped by 360, the majority of netizens collectively unconsciously followed 360 to engage in mass movements on the Internet. The final result is that hundreds of millions of netizens will never live a good life for a few days, and the victims will always be hundreds of millions of netizens. On the internet, netizens will never become gods, never have a real voice, and never escape the fate of being controlled and manipulated by online predators and oligarchs.

Seventh, without perfecting the anti-monopoly law, there will be no fairness and peace of the Internet. It is true that we are now oppressed by Tencent, which is in an absolute monopoly position in the IM instant messaging market. Many software companies took advantage of their monopoly and dominant position in the IM instant messaging market and were killed by Tencent, such as many game software and Lianzhong. Everyone knows that their interests have been eaten by the monopoly "shanzhai" crocodile Tencent, and they have withdrawn from the market they created and given up their own interests. At present, China's anti-monopoly law only has some principled provisions. Under the existing legal conditions, it is difficult to say that Ma's Tencent company's behavior is illegal. Horses are indeed immoral, but in an internet market that is seriously lacking in legal restrictions, the competition is so fierce that it is difficult for us to criticize horses alone, because in the lawless virtual world of the Internet, everyone is unscrupulous and unscrupulous. Only the strong is king, the losers are arrogant, and there is no fairness and justice. Let's think about it calmly. Those companies such as Rising, Jinshan, Koniu and Lianzhong, which were knocked out of the market by 360 and Tencent, and their employees are the real vulnerable groups on the Internet. They gave up all their interests and markets because of the monopoly of the Internet. Who wants to protect their interests? It is unfair in private if Tencent and Ma have to bear moral responsibility for hundreds of millions of netizens just because of this dispute. Tencent is a monopoly, but is there less monopoly in real society and online society? Aren't we still "enjoying" two-way charges for mobile communication and high oil prices of oil companies? Why do you want to be kidnapped and used by 360 to embarrass Tencent and Ma Hua Teng for the inconvenience caused by Tencent's pop-up advertisement, and act as cannon fodder and pusher of 360? This is not even a small profit for us. Can't we use QQ yet? Why are we so unfriendly? Why don't we criticize that China's Internet speed is only a few tenths of that of foreign countries, which has caused us much inconvenience in surfing the Internet? ! Is it because Tencent is the "weak" among hundreds of monopoly mega-enterprises in China that we go to "pick up soft persimmons"? Where is the moral and fair consciousness of our hundreds of millions of netizens? Therefore, China's anti-monopoly law is imperfect, which is the reason and key point of this dispute. Before it is perfected, as long as Tencent does not break the law, the horse is immoral, which is his right. He will lose face and cherish his reputation and honor. This is his freedom. Immorality is human freedom, and only those who break the law should be punished by law! Anti-monopoly is the responsibility and obligation of the state. Relevant state departments or industry departments should initiate anti-monopoly investigations and lawsuits against Tencent and 360 in accordance with the Anti-Monopoly Law. Let's return to rationality and call for the improvement of the Anti-Monopoly Law to ensure fair competition in the market and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers and hundreds of millions of netizens as soon as possible!