On April 16, 2026, the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court released its 2025 selection of exemplary unfair competition cases. The unfair competition dispute brought by Xue (anonymized) Information Co. and Xue (anonymized) Development Co. against Hang Co. (anonymized), Xiao Co. (anonymized), and Zeng (anonymized) was successfully included in this year's selection. GENLaw attorneys Steve Zhao, Jiaxin Zhang, and Martin Zhang served as counsel for the plaintiffs. A total of ten cases were published, collectively addressing a wide range of cutting-edge issues in the field of market competition.

Xue Information Co. and Xue Development Co. v. Hang Co., Xiao Co., and Zeng

Holding

1.     Where a platform applies algorithms to perform in-depth analysis, filtering, refinement, integration, and anonymized de-identification of aggregated datasets, thereby generating visualized data products of a predictive, index-based, or statistical nature, the platform's development and exploitation of such products is protected by law. Big-data analytics products derived from a platform's massive portfolio datasets constitute derivative data that have been processed and refined from large volumes of user-generated data. Because such derivative data can no longer be traced back to individual user-generated data, they possess independent data value. The corresponding data-related business interests shall accordingly vest in the platform operator.

2.     The use of AI-enabled technical means to scrape programmatic and quantitative securities trading data generated through simulated real stock trading on another party's platform, followed by the provision of automated, programmatic "cloning" services that issue real stock trading instructions to one's own paying subscribers, constitutes unfair competition.

Facts

Users of the Xue platform were able to independently create investment portfolios based on real-time securities market data provided by the platform. The platform tracked each user's portfolio rebalancing activity and calculated portfolio returns in accordance with actual stock market conditions and trading methodologies. Drawing on the extensive use of this service by a large number of users, the platform curated and organized the resulting information into various sections — including "Xue Trending Stocks" and "Xue Portfolio Leaderboard" — forming the portfolio rebalancing dataset asserted by Xue Information Co. and Xue Development Co.

Hang Co. developed a product called "AI Taocai," which employed technical means to automatically scrape the Xue platform's rebalancing data. AI Taocai then offered paid services enabling users to clone Xue portfolios and execute automated copy-trading — allowing investors to automatically follow Xue portfolio rebalancing without ever logging into the Xue platform or exercising independent judgment.

Xue Information Co. and Xue Development Co. brought suit, seeking an order requiring Hang Co. to cease scraping portfolio data from the Xue platform, discontinue the cloned portfolio trading services, publish a clarification statement to mitigate reputational harm, and pay damages in the amount of RMB 19.5 million.

Decision

The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court held at first instance that big-data analytics products derived from a platform's massive portfolio datasets constitute derivative data that have been processed and refined from large volumes of user-generated data. Because such derivative data can no longer be traced back to individual user-generated data, they possess independent data value, and the corresponding data-related business interests vest in the platform operator.

The court further held that Hang Co.'s AI Taocai product constituted unfair competition. By employing AI-enabled technical means to scrape programmatic and quantitative securities trading data generated through simulated real stock trading on another party's platform, and subsequently providing its subscribers with automated, programmatic "cloning" services to execute real stock trading instructions, Hang Co. had engaged in conduct that fell squarely within the scope of unfair competitive practices.

The court found that the improper gains Hang Co. had obtained through AI Taocai, including membership fees and other charges, far exceeded the claimed amount of RMB 19.5 million. The court therefore granted the plaintiffs' damages claim in full.

Following the first-instance judgment, Hang Co. filed an appeal but subsequently withdrew it during the second-instance proceedings. The first-instance judgment has since taken legal effect.

Significance

This case represents a landmark unfair competition dispute involving the deployment of AI-enabled technical means to misappropriate securities trading data rights and interests. It serves to meaningfully strengthen the protection of big-data analytics products in the financial sector.

To promote the efficient and sustainable circulation and application of data, the rights and interests of entities that develop data products must be respected. The challenged AI Taocai product directly caused a significant decline in user traffic and platform engagement, which constitute the very lifeblood of the Xue platform. This in turn undermined the ongoing generation and accumulation of portfolio rebalancing data and impaired the platform's business opportunities and competitive position. Furthermore, AI Taocai's clone trading functionality materially increased the trading risks borne by investors, harmed consumer interests, and disrupted the order of the securities investment market.

By granting the platform operator's damages claim in full, this case reflects the judiciary's resolute commitment to strengthening the protection of big-data analytics products in the financial sector and provides a valuable judicial reference for the continued development of data property rights frameworks in the financial industry.

This article represents only the views of the author and should not be regarded as formal legal opinions or advice of GENLaw.