In the digital age, market competition presents new characteristics, industrial development forms a new pattern, and judicial trials face new challenges. The Supreme People's Court has issued precise judgments and analyzed legal principles for typical cases of anti-monopoly and unfair competition, aiming to provide new guidance for legal application and inject new judicial momentum into the development of new quality productivity. Accurately identifying new forms of unfair competition and promoting high-quality development of the digital economy. With the rapid development of digital technology, new fields, new formats, and new models are constantly emerging, and online storage and live streaming are gradually entering the homes of ordinary netizens. At the same time, new forms of unfair competition such as "brush painting quantity" and "data accuracy obligation" have also emerged. In the "Light Douyin" unfair competition dispute case, unscrupulous operators use network technology vulnerabilities to obstruct others' normal operations and harm the legitimate rights and interests of other operators and consumers. The people's court comprehensively sorts out and deeply analyzes the new models and characteristics of online business, accurately identifies such new types of unfair competition, and reasonably determines the amount of compensation for damages. For example, in the case of unfair competition disputes on enterprise credit data platforms, the people's court actively explores judicial rules for protecting big data competition, and reasonably divides the boundaries of data rights ownership and usage behavior. The above typical cases have actively explored ways to maintain fair competition order and regulate the development of the digital industry. High compensation for malicious infringement, shaping a fair competitive environment. As a judicial measure, high discretionary compensation can significantly increase the cost of infringement and effectively curb malicious infringement. In the "New Energy Vehicle Chassis" technology secret infringement case, the Supreme People's Court adopted a holistic analysis approach to address organized, planned, and large-scale technology secret infringement. Taking into account the sales volume and unit price of the infringing party, the profit margin of similar representative enterprises, and the contribution rate of the involved secret technology, punitive damages were applied in accordance with the law, and the amount of compensation reached a new high in similar cases. High compensation can not only effectively combat infringement and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of rights holders, but also help purify the innovation environment and stimulate innovation vitality. Innovate the way of assuming civil liability and effectively safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the parties involved. Traditional intellectual property infringement judgments place special emphasis on compensation for damages, but when it comes to trade secret cases, stopping infringement is particularly important to prevent further leaks. The judgment of the "New Energy Vehicle Chassis" technology secret infringement case dares to innovate and explore, and on the basis of ordering the defendant to immediately stop the infringement, further refines and clarifies the ways, contents, and scope of stopping the infringement. This not only fully demonstrates the judicial attitude of strictly protecting technology secrets, but also effectively enhances the accuracy and effectiveness of intellectual property judicial protection, providing scientific guidance for the subsequent handling of similar cases. (New Press) (Author Peng Xuelong, Director and Professor of the Intellectual Property Research Center at Central South University of Economics and Law)