In today’s era of rapidly evolving internet technology, a wide range of innovative tools have emerged, bringing great convenience to people’s daily lives. However, the misuse of such technologies can also lead to a host of problems—ticket-grabbing software being a prime example. In 2024, Beijing Damai Cultural Media Development Co., Ltd. filed a lawsuit against the unfair competition practices involving ticket-grabbing software. The case not only attracted widespread public attention but also sparked new reflections on the protection of intellectual property rights.

Beijing Damai Cultural Media Development Co., Ltd. operates one of China’s largest integrated ticketing platforms—Damai.cn and the Damai app—offering tickets for concerts, sports events, theater performances, and family exhibitions. As the ticketing market boomed, ticket-grabbing software emerged, severely disrupting the normal operations of ticketing platforms.

The defendant, Zheng Mouzhong, sold ticket-grabbing software targeting the Damai app through an online store. The software simulated human operations, accelerating the ticket-ordering process and enabling repeated submissions in a short time, significantly increasing users’ chances of securing tickets. This not only undermined the platform’s operational order but also harmed the fair purchasing rights of other users.

Beijing Damai argued that Zheng’s software was specifically designed to interfere with its app, disrupt fair ticketing order, and damage its legitimate business interests—thus constituting unfair competition. The company requested the court to order Zheng to cease the infringement and compensate for economic losses and reasonable expenses.

The Dongcheng District People’s Court of Beijing ruled that the ticket-grabbing software did not qualify as fair competition driven by technological innovation. It merely simulated human ticket requests, increasing submission speed and refresh frequency. The court emphasized that this method lacked originality or technological advancement and was not a novel internet technology.

Moreover, the court noted that the software increased the platform’s operational costs, interfered with business decision-making, and made it harder for users to purchase tickets—reducing their satisfaction with Damai’s services. Although the software did not directly reduce ticket revenue for individual events, it harmed Damai’s business interests and reputation. Thus, the court ruled that Zheng’s actions constituted unfair competition and ordered him to pay RMB 20,000 in damages and legal costs. Neither party appealed, and the judgment became effective.

This case marks the first instance in China where ticket-grabbing software was ruled as unfair competition, setting a significant precedent. It clarifies that using technological means to gain unfair advantages in ticket purchasing disrupts platform rules, interferes with normal operations, and harms the competitive interests of specific businesses.

The ruling also takes into account consumers’ right to fair access and the integrity of the ticketing market. It serves as a warning to ticket-scalping service providers and tech developers to comply with legal boundaries. The case contributes to combating online gray-market activities, protecting the rights of businesses and consumers, and fostering a fair and orderly ticketing environment.

This case highlights the critical role of intellectual property protection in modern business competition. IP is not only a core corporate asset but also a key safeguard for fair market competition. In the digital age, the abuse of technology can lead to serious unfair competition, damaging corporate rights and market order.

Therefore, companies must strengthen IP protection and defend their rights through legal channels. Market research firms can also support this effort through data analysis and technical insights—such as monitoring market trends, identifying unfair competition, and advising on strategic responses. Consumer surveys can further reveal public awareness and attitudes toward such practices, helping businesses adjust their market strategies.

The unfair competition caused by ticket-grabbing software not only infringes upon ticketing platforms’ rights but also undermines fair market competition and consumer interests. The 2024 case demonstrates the judiciary’s firm commitment to protecting intellectual property and maintaining fair competition. Companies must enhance IP protection and use legal tools to defend their rights. Meanwhile, market research firms can leverage data and technology to help businesses counter unfair competition and preserve a healthy, equitable market ecosystem—ensuring sustainable development for all.