WELCOME TO THE DOUYU SECURITIES LITIGATION WEBSITE

This website has been established to provide general information related to the proposed settlement of the case known as In re Douyu International Holdings Limited Securities Litigation, Index No. 651703/2020 (the "State Action"), pending before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York: Commercial Division (the "Court" or “State Court”). The capitalized terms used on this website, and not otherwise defined, shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the Stipulation of Settlement dated June 3, 2022 (the "Stipulation"), which can be found and downloaded by clicking on the Case Documents tab above. Your rights may be affected by the Settlement if, between July 16, 2019, the date of DouYu's initial public offering (the “IPO”), and January 21, 2020, inclusive, (the “Class Period”), you purchased or otherwise acquired American Depositary Shares (“ADS”) of DouYu International Holdings Limited (“DouYu”).

The entities that lead the Actions, Marcus Chelf and Pavel Kovalenko (the “State Plaintiffs”) and Li Yunyan and Heng Huang (the “Federal Plaintiffs”), are collectively referred to as the “Plaintiffs.” The entities and individuals, DouYu; Cogency Global Inc. and Richard Arthur (collectively, the “Cogency Defendants”); J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, BofA Securities, Inc., and CMB International Capital Limited (collectively, the “Underwriter Defendants”); current or former DouYu officers and/or directors Shaojie Chen, Wenming Zhang, Chao Cheng, Mingming Su, Hao Cao, Ting Yin, Haiyang Yu, Xi Cao, Xuehai Wang, Zhaoming Chen, and Zhi Yan (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”); and Tencent Holdings Limited (“Tencent”), that are being sued are collectively referred to as the “Defendants.”

The law firms of Pomerantz LLP, Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, collectively “Class Counsel”, represent Settlement Class Members. Settlement Class Members will not be charged for these lawyers. They will be paid from the Settlement Fund to the extent the Court approves their application for fees and expenses.

WHAT ARE THE ACTIONS ABOUT?

The proposed Settlement will resolve all claims asserted in the State Action and the Federal Action (see page 1 of the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action found on the Case Documents tab above), which were both brought on behalf of a substantively identical class of DouYu investors. The State Action alleges that Defendants violated certain federal securities laws by making misrepresentations and/or omissions of material fact in the Offering Materials for DouYu’s IPO concerning (a) Tencent’s plans to invest at least $1 billion in another Chinese live-streaming company (“Kuaishou”), and the resulting risk that this investment would enable Kuaishou to expand and encroach upon DouYu’s eSports live-streaming business; (b) DouYu’s lucrative “lucky draw” feature, including the feature’s non-compliance with Chinese law and DouYu’s resulting plans to materially modify or eliminate it; (c) DouYu’s decelerating revenue growth in the face of increased competition; and (d) DouYu’s failure to verify the identity of one of its top streamers, who had been fabricating her identity to fool unsuspecting users. The Federal Action alleged much of the same misconduct, and also that Defendants made misrepresentations and/or omissions of material fact concerning the transferability of DouYu’s virtual currency and the impact on DouYu’s revenue of purchases by DouYu streamers of “virtual gifts” for themselves. Both Actions also allege that Defendants’ misstatements or omissions artificially inflated the price of DouYu ADS during the Class Period. Defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing and liability asserted in the Actions.

After the first State Action was filed on March 13, 2020, in June 2020, State Plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Complaint (the “State Complaint”), asserting claims under §11 of the Securities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act”) on behalf of a putative class of all those who purchased or otherwise acquired DouYu ADS pursuant or traceable to DouYu’s IPO Offering Materials. On August 14, 2020, the Settling Defendants moved to dismiss the State Complaint. Following full briefing and oral argument, on March 16, 2021, the Court issued an Order (the “MTD Order”) that denied the Settling Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Soon after, the Settling Defendants filed papers with the Appellate Division of New York seeking to reverse the MTD Order and dismiss the case. In the spring of 2021, the State Plaintiffs commenced discovery by serving document requests on the Settling Defendants. Those Defendants began producing documents responsive to those requests by the fall of 2021. The Settling Defendants also served document requests on the State Plaintiffs, who completed producing documents responsive to those Requests by the fall of 2021. The State Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification on August 12, 2021, and the Settling Defendants filed their papers opposing that motion on November 19, 2021. Meanwhile, having previously obtained an extension of time to effect service on defendant Tencent, State Plaintiffs served Tencent in China via the Hague Convention in late July 2021. Tencent thereafter moved to dismiss all claims against it for, inter alia, lack of personal jurisdiction on August 31, 2021, and that motion was fully briefed by October 29, 2021. Soon after, State Plaintiffs and Settling Defendants completed full briefing on the Settling Defendants’ pending interlocutory appeal of the MTD Order.

Meanwhile, on December 24, 2020, the Federal Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint in the Federal Action, asserting claims under both §11 of the 1933 Act and §10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 (“1934 Act”) on behalf of a substantively identical putative class as alleged in the State Action. The Federal Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint on April 2, 2021, and the Settling Defendants moved to dismiss that complaint on May 21, 2021. On June 11, 2021, the Federal Plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint (the “Federal Complaint”), and the Federal Court denied Defendants’ May 21, 2021 motions as moot. On July 19, 2021, the Settling Defendants moved to dismiss the Federal Complaint; thereafter, the Federal Plaintiffs filed papers opposing that motion on August 30, 2021, and the Settling Defendants served reply papers in further support of their motion on October 14, 2021. On November 24 and December 10, 2021, defendant Tencent and the Individual Defendants, respectively, filed their own motions to dismiss the Federal Complaint. Tencent’s motion was fully briefed on December 29, 2021.

While continuing to litigate the Actions, in the late summer of 2021, the parties retained an independent and experienced mediator, Robert Meyer, Esq. (the “Mediator”), to explore the possibility of a settlement. Following extended negotiations, the Plaintiffs and the Settling Defendants ultimately agreed to accept a “mediator’s proposal” to settle all claims at issue for US $15 million in cash. As of early January 2022, when the Settling Parties agreed in principle to the Settlement, (a) Tencent’s motion to dismiss the State Action and the State Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification were pending in the State Court; (b) the Settling Defendants’ interlocutory appeal of the State Court’s Motion to Dismiss Order was pending in the Appellate Division of the N.Y. Supreme Court; and (c) Defendants’ respective motions to dismiss the Federal Action were pending in the Federal Court.

WHAT DOES THE SETTLEMENT PROVIDE?

DouYu has agreed to pay or cause to be paid US $15,000,000 in cash (the “Settlement Amount”) into a settlement fund (the “Settlement Fund”) for the benefit of the Settlement Class. If the Settlement is approved by the Court and becomes effective, the Net Settlement Fund—consisting of (a) the Settlement Amount plus interest (net of taxes) earned thereon, minus (b) Notice and Administration Expenses, Court-approved plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and expenses, and any Court-approved awards to Plaintiffs—will be allocated among all “Authorized Claimants” (i.e. among those eligible Settlement Class Members who timely submit valid Claim Forms). Notice and Administration Expenses include the costs of printing and mailing the Notice and the costs of claims administration and processing. Distribution to Authorized Claimants will be made according to a Plan of Allocation to be approved by the Court.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Although the information in this website is intended to assist you, it does not replace the information contained in the Notice and Stipulation, both of which can be found and downloaded by clicking on the Case Documents tab above. We recommend that you read the Notice and other relevant case documents carefully.

YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT

IMPORTANT DATES AND DEADLINES