Zhitong App learned that on December 29th, according to the JD WeChat official account, the Beijing High People's Court made a first-instance judgment on the &#34;either-or&#34; case between JD and Zhejiang Tmall Network Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Tmall Technology Co., Ltd., and Alibaba Group Holding Limited. It determined that their abuse of market dominance to implement the &#34;either-or&#34; monopoly behavior was established, causing serious damage to JD, and ordered them to compensate JD with 1 billion yuan.
<img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.zhitongcaijing.com/image/20231229/1703842776981326.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="image.png" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.zhitongcaijing.com/image/20231229/1703842776981326.png"/>
Source: JD
JD-SWR stated that fair competition is the core of a market economy. Monopolistic behaviors such as &#34;either-or&#34; not only restrict market competition but also harm the legitimate rights and interests of brands, merchants, and consumers, and weaken the innovation and vitality of the market. From JD's lawsuit against the &#34;either-or&#34; monopoly in 2017 to JD's breaking of the industry's unwritten rules of &#34;super anchor price monopoly&#34; in 2023, JD has always been working for the development of brands and merchants and fighting for lower prices for consumers.
This judgment is not only a fair ruling on JD's resistance against the &#34;either-or&#34; monopoly behavior but also a significant moment in upholding the order of fair competition in the market through the rule of law. It will also be a highlight in China's anti-monopoly legal process.
According to public reports, in 2013, JD publicly stated that merchants were forced to choose &#34;either-or&#34; by Alibaba. In 2015, due to widespread dissatisfaction among merchants caused by the &#34;either-or&#34; policy, JD reported Alibaba to the State Administration for Market Regulation. In 2017, JD formally sued Alibaba for the &#34;either-or&#34; practice at the Beijing High People's Court. In 2019, the Supreme People's Court made a final ruling, rejecting Alibaba's objection to jurisdiction and confirming that the Beijing High People's Court has jurisdiction over this case. And now, this is the first-instance judgment of this year.
In addition, on April 10, 2021, Alibaba was fined 18.228 billion yuan by the State Administration for Market Regulation for the &#34;either-or&#34; practice, setting a historical record. People's Daily commented that the regulatory authorities' punishment of Alibaba Group is a regulation and rectification for the development of enterprises, a cleaning and purification of the industry environment, and a strong safeguard for the market order of fair competition.

89618

89988

09618

09988

BABA

JD has won the first-instance lawsuit against BABA-SWR's "Pick One of Two" policy and has been awarded a compensation of 1 billion yuan. JD opposes BABA-SWR's monopolistic behavior, believing that it restricts market competition and harms the rights and interests of brands, merchants, and consumers. This ruling is seen as a landmark moment in upholding fair market competition and an important step in China's anti-monopoly legal process. JD had previously filed a formal complaint with the State Administration for Market Regulation against BABA-SWR's "Pick One of Two" policy and filed a lawsuit against them in 2017. In addition, Alibaba has been fined 18.228 billion yuan by the State Administration for Market Regulation for the same policy.

Zhitong

JD-SWR

BABA-WR

JD-SW

BABA-W

JD.com

Alibaba

JD 在诉讼中获得了对阿里 “二选一” 案的一审胜诉，并获得了 10 亿元的赔偿。