On January 30, the State Administration for Market Regulation released a fifth batch of typical enforcement cases in the live-streaming e-commerce sector. Among them was the recent lawful investigation into Chengdu Kuaigou Technology Co., Ltd., the operator of Kuaishou's e-commerce platform.
The investigation found that the entity committed seven violations, including failing to legally fulfill information disclosure obligations, charging unreasonable fees to merchants on the platform, neglecting safety and security duties toward consumers, not taking necessary legal measures against intellectual property infringements, publishing illegal advertisements, assisting other businesses in conducting false or misleading commercial promotions, and providing display and transaction services for the illegal sale and purchase of wildlife products or prohibited hunting tools.
The State Administration for Market Regulation imposed an administrative penalty totaling 26.6929 million yuan in fines and confiscated illegal gains on the company.
Shu Lingmin, Deputy Director of the Online Supervision Department of the State Administration for Market Regulation, stated that this case reflects the administration's efforts to strengthen regular supervision of the platform economy, create a safe and trustworthy consumer environment, and maintain a fair and competitive market order.
It represents a typical enforcement action in the platform economy sector that comprehensively applied multiple laws, including the E-Commerce Law, and holds positive significance for promoting compliance among platform enterprises, protecting the legitimate rights and interests of merchants and consumers, and fostering the innovative and healthy development of the live-streaming e-commerce industry.
Market regulatory authorities maintain a "zero tolerance" stance toward prominent issues in the live-streaming e-commerce field, such as false marketing and the sale of counterfeit or shoddy goods.
In this case, the investigation focused on key aspects such as whether the entity fulfilled its obligations to verify merchant qualifications, whether it infringed upon the legitimate rights and interests of small and micro businesses, and whether it took effective measures to address consumer rights violations.
Based on these findings, the illegal activities were legally determined, and the penalty decision was made, sending a strong signal that regulation aims to promote development.
Comments