Tian Pujun complained of the defamation of the public, and we were the litigants – the Yunnan Channe-cosmax


Tian Pujun v. public no slander, we are "parties" – Yunnan Channel – people.com.cn original title: Tian Pujun v. public no slander, we are "parties" according to reports, the day before the actor Tian Pujun to the Chaoyang Court public "beast floor" holder of Ms. Wang, pointed out that the latter article "Tian Pujun Liao Han past, world this is unorthodox woman away" defamation, and demanded an apology, eliminate the effects of compensation for mental damages 500 thousand yuan and other reasonable expenses 5 yuan. In recent years, the number of WeChat public number increase sharply, driven by the interests of the public number of infringement cases and distorted rumors of health non upward trend. In the past year, well-known personages and enterprises in all walks of life have prosecuted the cases of WeChat public number rumor infringement. This incident of Tian Pujun’s prosecution of WeChat and a claim for $550 thousand has also aroused strong public concern. The public number and the circle of friends are an important source of information for us. In fact, we should have a "litigant" attitude. In fact, using the celebrity name enterprise effect, wantonly distorts the facts, taking the opportunity to win the eyeball has become a "magic weapon" for many public numbers to survive. Celebrities’ private lives or scandals are exposed, and they are always more likely to arouse the enthusiasm of the netizens. Entitled "Tian Pujun Liao Han the past, it was the world go wild ways a woman away" article published by the public number, more than 1 million 200 thousand is an example of reading within 7 hours. Tian Pujun has played at Prince Fu Jin in the hit series "The Legend of Zhen Huan", "Liao Han" "unorthodox" sensitive words for "Dun Prince Fu Jin" on the body, zenbu curious place open reading? Tian Pujun said this, the article does not respect the fact that its unwarranted accusations, slander, and the burden of the multiple presence of false language, and points out that the information publishers engaged in related transactions, even suspected of crimes. The final determination of the case is given to the court. To be sure, there are few cases of public number infringement. Only this "voice" of celebrities is not common, and for this reason, the lawsuit is less and less. Not these celebrities do not want to "count", but "don’t think about it", the cost of safeguarding rights is high, and the time span is long. For example, WeChat sued 10 KFC public number spread "KFC uses 6 wings of 8 legged chicken" rumor case, from the prosecution to the last drop not too slow, but also after half a year. As for large enterprises, as for the individuals who are infringed, they often have to choose patience. Tian Pujun, an actor who took up the rights of legal weapons, was just a very few of the numerous celebrities who were torts. Similar to the "Liao Han" "go wild ways" this kind of words, clearly undermine the reputation of party. Even if the article has been deleted, reputation damage has been caused, and 1 million 200 thousand Internet users will not forget the content of the article. But how bad it will cause to Tian Pujun’s public image and how much psychological and mental damage it will cause, it is very difficult to have a reasonable judgement. The 550 thousand yuan claim amount is legal, it is also necessary for the court to take a comprehensive consideration. Internet rumors and slander everywhere, in addition to the infringee "tolerance" and the high cost of rights, but also because since the media release of information is very difficult to identify the authenticity through technical means, is also unable to estimate the possible negative impact. In the operation standard of WeChat public platform, it is mentioned clearly that "we must not fabricate facts, openly defame others’ personalities, or damage others’ reputation by insulting or slander". However, the low cost of tort and the realistic context of obtaining high income make some people willing to take risks. As the commentator Cao Lin said "I do not believe that our law will tolerate such obvious and direct lie the rumor, as is slander, will not condone. The silence of the network will only make the circle of the network more and more chaotic. To purify the information channels for facts, it is not only necessary to restrict the law and system, but also to the self-discipline of the platform operators and the rebuke and counterattack of the infringed. (Lei Lei) (Zhu Hongxia, Sheng Yu wood: commissioning editor)

田朴珺诉公号诽谤,我们也是“当事人”–云南频道–人民网 原标题:田朴珺诉公号诽谤,我们也是“当事人”   据报道,日前 演员田朴珺向朝阳法院起诉公众号“兽楼处”持有人王女士,指出后者文章《田朴珺撩汉往事,世界就这样被走野路子的女人抢走》涉嫌诽谤,并要求赔礼道歉、消除影响,赔偿精神损失50万元及其他合理支出5万余元。   近几年来微信公众号的数量急剧增加,在利益的驱使下,有关公众号造谣生非、歪曲事实的侵权案件也呈上升趋势。过去一年,各界知名人士和企业起诉微信公众号造谣侵权的案件屡屡发生。这起田朴珺起诉微信公号并索赔55万元的事件也引发了舆论强烈关注。公众号和朋友圈是我们获取信息的重要来源,对于此次事件,其实我们也应有“当事人”的姿态。   事实上,利用名人名企效应,肆意歪曲事实,借机博取眼球已成为许多公众号赖以生存的“制胜法宝”。名人的私生活或是丑闻遭遇曝光,总是更容易引起网民的关注热情。题为《田朴珺撩汉往事,世界就这样被走野路子的女人抢走》的文章一经公号发表,7小时内阅读量超过120万就是例证。田朴珺曾在热播剧《甄嬛传》中饰演敦亲王福晋,“撩汉”“走野路子”等敏感词汇用于“敦亲王福晋”身上,怎不叫人好奇地点开一读?   对此田朴珺表示,文章不尊重事实,对其横加指责、诋毁,而且举证文中多处存在失实的语言,并指出信息发布者从事关联交易,甚至涉嫌违法犯罪。对于案件的最终定性,姑且交由法院去裁决。   可以肯定的是,公号侵权现象不乏少数。只是对此“发声”的名人并不多见,为此而打官司的更是少之又少。并非这些名人不想“计较”,而是“计较不起”,维权成本高,时间跨度长。比如,肯德基起诉10个微信公众号传播“肯德基使用6个翅膀8条腿怪鸡”谣言的案件,从起诉到最后落锤不算太慢,也前后经过了半年时间。对于大企业尚且如此,至于被侵权的个人,往往也就只能选择忍耐。拿起法律武器维权的演员田朴珺,只是众多被侵权名人中的极个别罢了。   类似于“撩汉”“走野路子”这类词语,明显有损当事人的名誉。即便文章已经删除,名誉损害也已经造成,120万网民也不会就此忘却文章内容。只是,这会给田朴珺的公众形象造成何种程度的恶劣影响,会对其造成多大的心理和精神损害,很难有一个合理的判断。55万元的索赔额度是否合法,还需法院进行综合考量。   网络空间谣言和诽谤满天飞,除了被侵权人的“隐忍”和维权成本过高,还因自媒体发布的信息很难通过技术手段辨识真伪,亦无法对可能出现的负面影响进行估计。微信公众平台运营规范中明确提到,“不得捏造事实公然丑化他人人格,或用侮辱、诽谤等方式损害他人名誉”。然而侵权成本低,获得收益高的现实语境,却让一些人甘愿冒险。   正如评论员曹林所言“我不相信我们的法律会纵容这种明显且直接睁着眼睛说瞎话的造谣”,如是诽谤,必然不能纵容。一味地沉默,只会让网络的圈子越来越混乱。而净化讲事实的信息渠道,不只需要法律与制度的约束,还需要平台运营者的自律与被侵权人的痛斥与反击。(磊磊) (责编:木胜玉、朱红霞)相关的主题文章: