In the case of dispute over unfair competition filed by Beijing Micro Dream Network Technology Co., Ltd. ("Micro Dream") against Beijing Taoyou World Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Taoyou World Technology Development Co., Ltd. ("Taoyou Company"), the second instance court Beijing IP Court ruled in favor of Micro Dream with the verdict of Case (2016) J73MZ No. 588 on December 30, 2016. As the final case heard by Beijing IP Court in 2016, the case was selected as a typical case of Beijing IP Court in 2016 because it "standardizes market order and promotes fair competition."

Taoyou Company was found as constituting unfair competition and was sentenced to cease unfair competition, publish a statement on unfair competition for 48 consecutive hours on the homepage of maimai.cn, eliminate the impact of unfair competition in this case on Micro Dream, and compensate Micro Dream for economic losses in excess of 2 million yuan. 

Micro Dream states in the lawsuit that after years of hard work, Micro Dream has transformed Sina Weibo into a brand-new online communication tool and made it the most influential platform for information dissemination and communication in China. The "MaiMai" app operated by Taoyou Company is a mobile client-based social networking application, and like Sina Weibo, belongs to the social networking software. Thus, the two have a competitive relationship under the anti-unfair competition law.

Micro Dream argues that Taoyou Company implemented a series of acts of unfair competition, such as illegally obtaining user data from the Weibo platform, maliciously copying the design and related content of Weibo products, improperly gaining interests, and maliciously vilifying Micro Dream to damage its business reputation. Taoyou Company refutes this argument, saying that its use of information from Weibo is legitimate, and there is no plagiarism. It does not violate the "Developer Agreement" or "MaiMai Service Agreement". The statements and declarations published by Taoyou Company on the relevant media regarding Micro Dream are based on facts and real sources, without fabricating and disseminating false facts; it is not malicious slander.

After the unsuccessful verdict at the first instance, Taoyou Company appealed to Beijing IP Court. Beijing IP Court made a final judgment and upheld the verdict of the first verdict after making new authoritative demonstration of the facts. 

The case can be the first case of big data in the commercial area. we consider that in the era of big data, user information has become one of the most important basic elements in the data economy to enhance efficiency and support innovation. Therefore, the acquisition and use of data not only becomes the source of competitive advantage for enterprises, but also can create more economic benefits for enterprises. It is an important competitive advantage and commercial resource for operators. The data provider shall protect the user data and information that serves as a competition advantage and deem the protection of user data and information as a corporate social responsibility. Data providers shall take appropriate technical measures to enhance the protection of user information. The above viewpoints are recognized by Haidian People's Court which is the first instance court and Beijing IP Court.