Advertising revenue is one of the major sources of revenue for video sites, but viewers often complain about a minute and a half of them.
Seizing the pain of netizens, some router products have introduced a screened advertising function, and serve as a big selling point, a move that has led to dissatisfaction with video sites, litigation cases have also emerged one after another in recent years.
recently, Haidian court accepted a case with Sohu prosecution Meizu routers, Sohu think Meizu routers suspected of unfair competition, claim 2.1 million yuan.
Plaintiff Flying Fox Information Technology (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Flying Fox), Plaintiff Beijing Sohu Internet Information Service Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Sohu) and defendant Meizu Technology Co., Ltd. Zhuhai (Meizu Technology) Limited (Meizu communications company) unfair competition dispute case.
The plaintiffs Feihu Company and Sohu Company claimed that both of them are the operators of Sohu Video Network and the corresponding APPs, which provide hundreds of thousands of genuine HD video content to users, both of which have paid for the above video contents High royalties, and reap the benefits of advertising by showing ads on your web pages and playing ads to users before they're played.
Two plaintiffs found that, The defendant Meizu Technology Co., Ltd. and the defendant, Meizu Communication Co., Ltd. jointly manufacture and sell a wireless router product called 'Meizu Router Speed Edition'. When the product is connected to the Internet to play the video content of the plaintiff website and APP, the defendant can completely shield the video before playing Advertising and other web advertising.
Meizu technology companies and Meizu communications company to 'automatically intercept video site advertising' as a promotional language to attract users to buy the product.
The two plaintiffs considered the above two acts as unfair competition and undermined the legitimate rights and interests of the two plaintiffs. Therefore, they sued the court and asked the court to order the two defendants to stop producing and selling the infringing products involved in the case. The two plaintiffs' economic losses and reasonable expenditures totaled 2.1 million yuan.
At present, the case is under further investigation.
It is understood that the Meizu router speed version released in June last year, priced at $ 199. Founder quite Founder, dual antenna design, known as ordinary routing signal increased by 25%, claiming to cover 200 square meters room, it also supports 802.11ac wireless protocol.
Function, Meizu speed version of the router supports a key Internet access, remote switch computers, video ads, web filtering ads In addition, there are plug-ins to choose from.
