4.86 million fans "Big V" sentenced to 100000 yuan in compensation, reprinted article about Chen's academic fraud, personal emotional life and other false content Chen | online | article

Self media, with its strong interaction, fast updates, and wide dissemination, has attracted a large number of users and has become an important part of the online communication ecosystem. However, some "internet giants" attract attention, gain traffic and profit by manipulating hot topics, creating false headlines, and fabricating false events, breeding a lot of false and harmful information, disrupting the normal order of the online space. In order to rectify the chaos of self media, the Central Cyberspace Administration has issued new regulations, starting from 13 aspects such as strengthening qualification certification, strengthening rumor management, and standardizing account operation, requiring website platforms to strengthen the main responsibility of information content management, and promote the formation of a good network public opinion ecology through normalized management system and mechanism.

Recently, the Beijing Internet Court heard a dispute over the infringement of the reputation of public figures by the untrue statements of "Internet TV". The court found that the content of the blog published by "Internet TV" Zhou lacked objective basis, exceeded the scope of reasonable public opinion supervision, and infringed the reputation of public property Chen. It decided that the defendant Zhou made an apology to the plaintiff Chen through the online platform account involved in the case, and paid 100000 yuan to the plaintiff Chen for mental damage. At present, the judgment in this case has come into effect.

Case Review

Zhou used his account opened on a certain platform to move and repost an article about Chen's academic fraud, personal emotional life, and other content. On the same day, it attracted over 6300 reposts, more than 22000 comments, and nearly 660000 likes. The topic of the case once made it to the hot search list of the platform, causing high attention and discussion among netizens.

The plaintiff Chen claimed that the defendant Zhou, without any verification, published false information, spread rumors, and smeared the plaintiff, causing extremely negative impact on the plaintiff's reputation and infringing on the plaintiff's right to reputation. Due to the fact that the plaintiff is a public figure, the damage to their reputation rights is more severe. The plaintiff, Chen, requests the court to order the defendant, Zhou, to publicly apologize and pay compensation for mental damages.

The defendant Zhou argued that he only reprinted and moved online articles, and made speculative remarks. He always maintained a neutral attitude towards the incident, subjectively did not have any intention of infringement, objectively did not insult or defame the plaintiff, and did not infringe on the plaintiff's right to reputation.

After investigation, it was found that the involved online platform account had nearly 4.86 million followers and was certified as one of the "2020 Top 10 Influential Entertainment Big Vs" and "Famous Entertainment Bloggers" on the platform. The defendant Zhou is the real name registrant and actual user of the account.

After trial, the court held that

Reputation is a social evaluation of the character, reputation, talent, and credit of civil subjects. Citizens have the right to reputation and are prohibited from damaging their reputation through insults, defamation, or other means. Internet users who use the internet to infringe upon the reputation rights of others shall bear the liability for infringement. If a citizen's right to reputation is infringed upon, they have the right to demand cessation of infringement, restoration of reputation, elimination of influence, apology, and compensation for losses.

In this case, the plaintiff Chen, as a public figure, has a duty of tolerance in accepting public opinion supervision and fulfilling the public's right to know. However, the authenticity of the content of the blog in question lacks objective basis and goes beyond the reasonable scope of public opinion supervision. The defendant Zhou, in order to guide the direction of the topic and attract traffic, published an article through his "Internet Big V" account, and further spread and spread the speech by adding discussion topics. However, he did not fulfill the obligation of reasonable verification of the content with derogatory or defamatory content in the article, which is subjective fault. The blog post involved in the case has attracted high attention on the internet in a short period of time, with a large audience and a wide range of influence, which can lead to a decrease in the plaintiff's personal reputation and social evaluation, resulting in damage to the plaintiff's reputation rights.

In summary, the court believes that the defendant Zhou's behavior in the case does not belong to the non-profit forwarding behavior of ordinary internet users, but should be recognized as a malicious marketing behavior that uses network attention and influence to spread false information, attract fans, and profit from rumors. It has constituted an infringement on the plaintiff Chen's reputation rights and should bear corresponding infringement liability.

Judgment result

The defendant Zhou publicly issued an apology letter to the plaintiff Chen through the involved online platform account, apologizing and paying a compensation of RMB 100000 for mental damages to the plaintiff Chen. At present, the judgment in this case has come into effect.

Court statement

The Internet is not a place outside the law, nor a "hotbed" of false and negative information. Freedom of speech and public opinion supervision have basic legitimacy. Expression and evaluation of speech are based on objective facts and are the boundaries of freedom of speech. They cannot break the bottom line of legal provisions and public order and good customs.

The greater the influence of the speaker, the more special their identity, and the more serious the consequences of inappropriate speech. For the influential online influencers, their public speech has characteristics such as fast dissemination speed, irreversible consequences, and significant social impact. Compared to ordinary people, they have a higher duty of care and should use their influence carefully, pay attention to the boundaries of their speech, and abide by the legal bottom line.