How to protect one's legitimate rights and interests when encountering online violence? Let's take a look at a typical case: Fan Mou | Weibo | Network
By the end of last year, the number of netizens in China had reached 1.067 billion, and the Internet penetration rate had reached 75.6%. The high popularity of the Internet not only brings people high efficiency and convenience, but also breeds the "cancer" of cyber violence. Some people engage in online violence such as verbal abuse, slander, and invasion of privacy, which undermines the personality and reputation of others. Some have caused serious consequences such as social death, mental disorders, and suicide. Recently, the Beijing Internet Court announced several typical cases involving cyber violence.
The court sentenced 30000 yuan in compensation for sexual harassment committed through the internet
In court, Ms. Xu, the plaintiff, filed a lawsuit alleging that the defendant Li used photos posted on her Weibo account without her consent. After undergoing technical cropping, she deliberately enlarged sensitive parts of her female body and publicly used them as her Weibo account avatar. She also posted 5 Weibo posts insulting and sexually harassing her.
Due to the defendant's extensive use of her own photos on Weibo, accompanied by obscene and insulting language, and even specifically @ herself after posting, Ms. Xu believed that she had suffered serious sexual harassment and reported it to the public security organs. Li was ultimately subjected to administrative detention for 5 days by the public security organs.
The court investigation found that the defendants Li and Ms. Xu were colleagues of the same company. Li said that he was very angry when he heard someone say that Ms. Xu had some negative evaluations of him. It was out of frustration and revenge that he made the above behavior. Ms. Xu does not agree with this and stated that she did not have a negative evaluation of Mr. Li.
After the defendant Li was punished by the public security organs, Ms. Xu also successfully complained to the Weibo platform, and the infringing Weibo was forcibly taken offline. But to Ms. Xu's surprise, the defendant Li continued to insult and sexually harass herself through Weibo private messages and other means.
Zhang Qian, Judge of Beijing Internet Court: He also made corresponding comments under the microblog of other unrelated persons. The content of this comment also involves the plaintiff's indecent remarks, and @ the plaintiff, so that netizens can find the plaintiff's own microblog account through his indecent remarks.
After the trial, the court held that, in accordance with Article 1010 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, if a person engages in sexual harassment against the will of another person by means of language, text, images, physical behavior, etc., the victim has the right to request the perpetrator to bear civil liability in accordance with the law. It was ultimately determined that the defendant Li's behavior constituted sexual harassment, and Li was ordered to apologize to Ms. Xu and compensate a compensation of 30000 yuan for mental damages.
Zhang Qian, Judge of Beijing Internet Court: In the cases involving online sexual harassment that we are hearing, there is actually no physical contact, but the release of sexual hints in the form of language, words, pictures, etc., or some words, pictures, etc. related to sexual harassment also constitutes sexual harassment. In our case, the remarks made by the defendant were extremely insulting and carried strong sexual implications, so we also determined that he constituted sexual harassment.
"Internet Big V" reposts untrue articles and maliciously hypes up, resulting in a compensation of 100000 yuan
Next, let's take a look at a case where "Internet Big V" created sensational information, shared false articles, and engaged in malicious marketing hype in order to attract attention and traffic, leading to online violence against the target of infringement and ultimately being recognized by the court for infringement.
The plaintiff, Chen, is a contestant on a variety show and a public figure. The defendant, Zhou, is an "entertainment big V" and a well-known entertainment blogger with over 6 million fans. In court, the plaintiff Chen claimed that the defendant made false statements through his Weibo account on November 30, 2020, claiming that the plaintiff's academic fraud and love for his wife were shattered. As a male mistress, he spread rumors and maliciously insulted and defamed the plaintiff, causing 6372 reprints, more than 22000 comments, and nearly 660000 likes on the same day. The topic involved in the case once made it onto the Weibo hot search list of that day, causing high attention and discussion on the internet.
The plaintiff believes that the defendant's behavior of releasing false information, spreading rumors, and smearing the plaintiff without any verification has had a very negative impact on the plaintiff's reputation and reputation. The plaintiff requests the court to order the defendant to publicly apologize and pay a compensation of 350000 yuan for mental damages.
Defendant's litigation representative Wang Yingwen: We are the first publisher of someone else's article, not the first publisher. The defendant only made neutral and speculative remarks. What we wrote was suspected of academic fraud, and then the question marks were speculative and neutral, without any defamation.
In the trial, in response to the defendant's comments on the plaintiff's academic fraud and being a male mistress, the plaintiff submitted their university admission notice, including some materials formed during the doctoral degree defense process, to prove that their doctoral degree was in compliance with relevant academic standards. In response to the issue of "mistresses," the plaintiff submitted a third party testimony to prove that the divorce of the parties had no relationship with themselves.
After the court's trial, it was found that in this case, the plaintiff, as a public figure, has a duty of tolerance in accepting public opinion supervision and fulfilling the public's right to information. However, the authenticity of the Weibo content involved lacks objective basis and goes beyond the scope of reasonable public opinion supervision. The defendant did not fulfill the obligation of reasonable verification of derogatory and defamatory content in the article when forwarding it through the "Weibo Big V" account, guided the topic direction, maliciously promoted hype, attracted traffic to seek improper benefits, and had subjective fault.
Judge Zhu Ge of Beijing Internet Court: The defendant is a "big V" related to entertainment, and the words spread in this case are related to entertainment, so we believe that he has a higher duty of care, and he did not fulfill this basic duty of care when forwarding, so he was wrong. Based on the data, it can be seen that the consequences of the damage are relatively large and the scope of impact is relatively large, so we comprehensively determine that it constitutes an infringement.
Finally, the court ruled that the defendant publicly released an apology letter to the plaintiff through the Weibo account involved in the case, apologizing and paying the plaintiff a compensation of 100000 yuan for mental damages. After the defendant appealed, the second instance court upheld the first instance verdict. At present, the judgment has come into effect.
Da V's private message was criticized and "hung up" to vent his anger, and was found to have infringed upon the right
Although the internet is a virtual space, it is by no means a lawless place. Everyone is their own "spokesperson", and the expression and evaluation of their opinions cannot exceed the bottom line of legal regulations and public order and good customs. To govern online violence, the first thing everyone needs to do is not to actively engage in online violence against others. However, when encountering online violence from others, one cannot "use violence to control violence", otherwise they will also bear the responsibility for infringement.
Wang is a legal "big V" blogger on the Weibo platform, with nearly 500000 followers. Another Weibo user, Fan, who is still studying in university, sent insulting remarks to Wang and his family through a private message on Weibo due to a hot current affairs issue and different views from Wang. Wang was very angry and publicly posted Fan's Weibo account, personal photos, and the name of the university he attended. He publicly "hung people" on Weibo and continuously posted multiple Weibo posts and comments, using a large number of insulting remarks to counterattack Fan, which attracted the attention, comments, and reposts of many netizens.
Zhang Yaguang, assistant judge of Beijing Internet Court: Because this "big V" is really influential, he called on his fans, that is to say, to see whose child this is, let everyone see the uneducated things, and launched netizens to carry out online violence and human flesh search on college students.
In order to retaliate against Fan, this "Internet celebrity" even targeted the official website of Fan's university, as well as public welfare organizations and institutions such as the University Student Union, on Weibo related Weibo posts, and carried out online violence against Fan. In order to calm the situation, Fan repeatedly apologized to Wang through private messages on Weibo and even sent apology red envelopes, but Wang did not accept them. He sued Fan and requested that he be ordered to publish an apology letter and pay for mental damages on his personal Weibo and the official website of his university.
After trial, the court found that Fan insulted Wang through private messages, using uncivilized and insulting language, which damaged Wang's personal dignity and constituted an infringement of Wang's general personality rights. At the same time, as an influential "Big V" blogger and legal worker, Wang's use of insulting remarks accompanied by photos of Fan exceeded reasonable limits, infringing on Fan's reputation and portrait rights. Finally, both parties were sentenced to apologize in writing to each other, and the amount of compensation for mental damages was offset against each other.
The judge said that in this case, Wang, as a legal "Internet big V", his behavior was extremely unacceptable. He went from being a victim of online violence to eventually becoming the perpetrator.
Zhang Yaguang, assistant judge of the Beijing Internet Court: Like the "Internet Big V", they actually have a relatively certain say in the Internet field. His comments have the characteristics of fast transmission, irreversible consequences, and great influence. Therefore, compared with the words of ordinary people, the "Internet Big V" has a higher duty of care for their comments and uses their influence more carefully.
How to protect one's rights when encountering online violence?
Faced with online violence, "using violence to control violence" is absolutely unacceptable. What measures should be taken to protect one's legitimate rights and interests?
The judge suggested that the private messaging function of social media accounts such as Weibo can be quickly turned off to avoid receiving more online bullying information, and then complaints and reports can be made to social media platforms.
Judge Zhu Ge of the Beijing Internet Court: Then you can send an effective notice to the platform, saying who you are, what happened, and what the link is. If you give the platform a clear direction, pointing to the link that has caused you harm, the platform has the obligation to remove, block, and disconnect the link, which is a timely protection for you.
The parties involved in cyberbullying can also report to the public security organs for help, or fix relevant evidence in a timely manner through screenshots, screen recordings, and other means, and file a lawsuit with the people's court in accordance with the law to protect their legitimate rights and interests.
