First, Simba and Shi Damei sued for traffic restrictions.
In this lawsuit, Simba claimed that he spent 25 million yuan and increased by 30 million yuan, but the traffic decreased. He believes that the original platform agreement stipulates that the traffic can only be enjoyed by Simba, but it was accidentally released by the platform, which means that the traffic between the live broadcast rooms is determined by fair competition in the market. He believes that Aauto's faster platform violates the original contract. The reason why Stalme sued Aote Express Platform together with Simba is that Stalme and Simba have the same litigation reasons. They think that Aauto's faster platform has the problem of limiting their money to buy traffic.
Second, the appeal is unreasonable.
The beautiful demands of Simba and Shida are actually unreasonable. First of all, it is debatable whether the contract they signed with Aauto Faster Platform was established. After all, traffic can't be bought and sold publicly, which is something we must clearly realize. Secondly, fans involve personal information, it is illegal to sell personal information, and it also involves the management of the public domain. Aauto's faster platform can't dominate the world, so it's ridiculous for Simba to sue the top ten beauty companies. I don't know who let Simba and Shida Beauty unite to sue Aauto Faster Platform. The traffic of Aauto Faster Platform is notoriously open.
Third, traffic transactions will eventually harm others and themselves.
In fact, the sale of traffic is ultimately harmful to others. Even if Simba said that spending huge sums of money to buy fans to increase traffic, first of all, buying and selling traffic will harm himself. Most of the traffic bought is not dynamic. Since his fans are basically zombie fans and robot fans, how can the anchor ask zombie fans to pay attention to himself? Secondly, if the seller who buys and sells traffic does not hand over the traffic to the anchor according to the contract, then the seller's behavior seems to violate the contract; But the sales contract they signed was invalid from the beginning. How can you say that the seller is wrong? The drawbacks of the platform are exposed, and the reputation of the anchor has plummeted, which is harmful to others; Simba and others not only spent money, but also didn't get the traffic.