>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
No. 2 of Eight Model Cases regarding Infringement upon Personal Rights and Interests by Using the Information Network Published by the Supreme People's Court: Cai Jiming v. Baidu Inc (dispute over infringement upon right of reputation, right of portrait, right of name, and right of privacy)
最高人民法院公布8起利用信息网络侵害人身权益典型案例之二:蔡继明与百度公司侵害名誉权、肖像权、姓名权、隐私权纠纷案--不宜仅以侵权信息的出现即认定网络服务提供者知道侵权事实的存在
【法宝引证码】

No. 2 of Eight Model Cases regarding Infringement upon Personal Rights and Interests by Using the Information Network Published by the Supreme People's Court: Cai Jiming v. Baidu Inc (dispute over infringement upon right of reputation, right of portrait, right of name, and right of privacy)
(dispute over infringement upon right of reputation, right of portrait, right of name, and right of privacy)
最高人民法院公布8起利用信息网络侵害人身权益典型案例之二:蔡继明与百度公司侵害名誉权、肖像权、姓名权、隐私权纠纷案--不宜仅以侵权信息的出现即认定网络服务提供者知道侵权事实的存在
No. 2 of Eight Model Cases regarding Infringement upon Personal Rights and Interests by Using the Information Network Published by the Supreme People's Court: Cai Jiming v. Baidu Inc (dispute over infringement upon right of reputation, right of portrait, right of name, and right of privacy)
-It is inappropriate to determine that the network service provider knows the infringement fact only based on the occurrence of infringement information
 最高人民法院公布8起利用信息网络侵害人身权益典型案例之二:蔡继明与百度公司侵害名誉权、肖像权、姓名权、隐私权纠纷案--不宜仅以侵权信息的出现即认定网络服务提供者知道侵权事实的存在
(1) Basic Facts (一)基本案情
After plaintiff made public his proposal for the holiday reform as a CPPCC member, it arose great public opinions and concerns. In the “Cai Jiming Post Bar” opened on tieba.baidu.com, network users published insulting and defaming words and images, and Cai Jiming's personal information including his mobile phone number and home telephone number was also published. On the home page of tieba.baidu.com, Baidu Inc prescribed the general rules for using the “Baidu Post Bar” and the ways and rules for complaints. In particular, any user who identifies the content of any post is suspected of insulting or defaming other person, infringing upon the lawful rights and interests of other person, or violating the agreement of “Baidu Post Bar” has the right to file a complaint according to the complaint rules of “Baidu Post Bar.” Cai Jiming commissioned Liang Wenyan to negotiate with Baidu Inc by telephone regarding the involved post; however, Baidu Inc failed to deal with it. Afterwards, Liang Wenyan applied for serving as the administrator of “Cai Jiming Post Bar,” but her application was not approved. Liang Wenyan then sent a message to the post bar management group and applied for deleting the infringing posts in this post bar, but the management group did not respond. On October 13, 2009, Cai Jiming commissioned a lawyer to send a lawyer's letter to Baidu Inc and required Baidu Inc to perform its statutory duty, delete the infringing comments, and close the “Cai Jiming Post Bar.” Upon receipt of the lawyer's letter, Baidu Inc deleted the suspected infringing posts in the “Cai Jiming Post Bar.” Cai Jiming filed a lawsuit against Baidu Inc and required Baidu Inc to delete the infringing information, close the “Cai Jiming Post Bar,” disclose the personal information of network users releasing infringing information, and compensate for losses. 原告作为政协委员公开发表假日改革提案后,引起社会舆论关注。网络用户于百度贴吧中开设的“蔡继明吧”内,发表了具有侮辱、诽谤性质的文字和图片信息,且蔡继明的个人手机号码、家庭电话等个人信息也被公布。百度公司在“百度贴吧”首页分别规定了使用“百度贴吧”的基本规则和投诉方式及规则。其中规定,任何用户发现贴吧帖子内容涉嫌侮辱或诽谤他人,侵害他人合法权益的或违反贴吧协议的,有权按贴吧投诉规则进行投诉。蔡继明委托梁文燕以电话方式与百度公司就涉案贴吧进行交涉,但百度公司未予处理,梁文燕又申请作“蔡继明贴吧”管理员,未获通过,后梁文燕发信息给贴吧管理组申请删除该贴吧侵权帖子,但该管理组未予答复。2009年10月13日,蔡继明委托律师向百度公司发送律师函要求该公司履行法定义务、删除侵权言论并关闭“蔡继明吧”。百度公司在收到该律师函后,删除了“蔡继明吧”中涉嫌侵权的网帖。蔡继明起诉百度公司请求删除侵权信息,关闭“蔡继明吧”、披露发布侵权信息的网络用户的个人信息以及赔偿损失。
...... (二)裁判结果
 北京市海淀区人民法院一审认为,百度贴吧服务是以特定的电子交互形式为上网用户提供信息发布条件的网络服务,法律并未课以网络服务商对贴吧内的帖子逐一审查的法律义务,因此,不能因在网络服务商提供的电子公告服务中出现了涉嫌侵犯个人民事权益的事实就当然推定其应当“知道”该侵权事实。根据《互联网电子公告服务管理规定》,网络服务商仅需对其电子公告平台上发布的涉嫌侵害私人权益的侵权信息承担“事前提示”及“事后监管”的义务,提供权利人方便投诉的渠道并保证该投诉渠道的有效性。百度公司已尽到了法定的事前提示和提供有效投诉渠道的事后监督义务,未违反法定注意义务。百度公司在2009年10月15日收到蔡继明律师函后,立即对侵权信息进行了删除处理,不承担侵权责任。
 ......

Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥200.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese