>>>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
 
Peng Jiahui v. Chinese Story (Case on Dispute over the Right to Reputation)
彭家惠诉《中国故事》杂志社名誉权纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Peng Jiahui v. Chinese Story (Case on Dispute over the Right to Reputation)
(Case on Dispute over the Right to Reputation)
彭家惠诉《中国故事》杂志社名誉权纠纷案

Peng Jiahui v. Chinese Story
(Case on Dispute over the Right to Reputation)@#
BASIC FACTS@#
Plaintiff: Peng Jiahui, female, borne on December 28, 1901, of the Han nationality, dwelling in Chengdu City, Sichuang Province@#
Authorized Agent: He Shifang & Lan Bo, lawyers of Xishu Law Firm of Chengdu City, Sichuang Province@#
Defendant: Chinese Story, domiciled in Wuhan City, Hubei Province@#
Person-in-charge: Deng Deyuan, editor-in-chief of Chinese Story@#
Authorized Agent: Zheng Shi, lawyer of Desai Law Firm of Zhuhai City, Guangdong Province;@#
Authorized Agent: Liang Yuanlin, deputy director of the People's Arts Museum, Hubei Province@#
Peng Jiahui had a dispute over reputation with Chinese Story (hereinafter referred to as Chinese Story) and thus filed an action with the Intermediate People's Court of Chengdu City, Sichuang Province.@#
The plaintiff alleged that, the story of “Evil Spirit of Trouble (huo sui)” as produced by Zhou Huang that was published in Chinese Story (4th edition, 1998) tampered with the historical story of her brother, Peng Jiazhen, a revolutionary martyr, and thereby incurred a severe negative impact both at home and abroad. Although the defendant expressed its willingness for proper handling, it made every effort to shirk off the liabilities in its published Apology, which was far from being enough to recover the Peng Jiazhen's reputation or remedy the spiritual and material losses that the his relatives have been suffering. Peng Jiahui thus requested Chinese Story to make an in-depth and serious apology, eradicate the negative impacts at home and abroad as well as compensate 465, 000 yuan of spiritual losses as well as 38, 590 yuan of physical losses for its injury on the Peng Jiazhen's reputation.@#
The defendant argued that: Peng Jiahui's action has exceeded the limitation of actions. Chinese Story is not obligated to verify the heroes and events in popular stories and cannot check the heroes during the Revolution of 1911. After Chinese Story learned that the story “Evil Spirit of Trouble” did injure the reputation of Peng Jiazhen, it made an immediate public apology, adopted the relevant measures for alteration and thus constituted no infringement upon Peng Jiahui.@#
......

 

彭家惠诉《中国故事》杂志社名誉权纠纷案@#
@#
原告:彭家惠,女,1901年12月28日出生,汉族,住四川省成都市。@#
委托代理人;何世方、兰波,四川省成都市西蜀律师事务所律师。@#
被告:《中国故事》杂志社。住所地:湖北省武汉市。@#
负责人:邓德元,该杂志主编。@#
委托代理人:郑石,广东省珠海市德赛律师事务所律师;@#
委托代理人:梁远林,湖北省群众艺术馆副馆长。@#
原告彭家惠因与被告《中国故事》杂志社(以下简称杂志社)发生名誉侵权纠纷,向四川省成都市中级人民法院提起诉讼。@#
原告诉称:1998年第4期《中国故事》杂志刊载了周簧撰写的故事《祸祟》,篡改了其兄彭家珍烈士的历史,在国内外造成了极其恶劣的影响。被告虽表示愿意妥善处理,但在刊登致歉声明中却极力推卸责任,不足以恢复彭家珍烈士名誉,也不足以弥补其作为烈士亲属造成的精神和物质损失。要求杂志社作出深刻、郑重的赔礼道歉,并在海内外消除恶劣影响,赔偿侵害彭家珍烈士名誉的精神损失费465000元,物质损失38590元。@#
被告辩称:原告彭家惠起诉的时间已超过了诉讼时效;杂志社对通俗小说中的人物、事件没有核实的义务,也不可能对辛亥革命历史时期的人物情况进行核实。杂志社在得知小说《祸祟》确实侵害了彭家珍烈士的名誉后,立即作了公开致歉,采取了更正措施,不对彭家惠构成侵权。@#
成都市中级人民法院经审理查明,@#
《中国故事》杂志系以小说为主要文体的双月刊杂志。1998年第4期登载了周簧创作的小说《祸祟》,讲述了1928年发生在上海的一起特大诈骗案,其中用了很大篇幅讲述了清朝军咨使良弼的女儿白良玉为父复仇的情节。小说将辛亥革命历史人物彭家珍为推翻清王朝,炸死军咨使良弼时以身殉国的真实事件,虚构了彭家珍因刺杀良弼被当场抓获,乘乱逃脱后又效劳于英国情报机关,最后被白良玉找到并杀死。小说将彭家珍作为反面人物,描述为“恶魔”。小说中的人物对话讲到:“革命党人派彭家珍行刺令尊大人,毕竟不是私仇,国人不认为他有错。但现在这个彭家珍又受雇于黑寡妇,助纣为虐,当然该杀了”、“彭家珍,你那脸上四两肉打不成胖子,你如果是正直的革命党人,就不会成为黑寡妇豢养的一条癞皮狗……”。小说中的彭家珍自称:“老子行不改名坐不改姓,从前是响当当的革命党人,如今是大英帝国的私人保镖”。小说对彭家珍的死作了如下描写:彭家珍“顾不得血淋淋手断后的剧痛,双膝着地求饶说:姑娘,你废了我右手,就高抬贵手饶我一命吧”、“彭家珍连连叩头说:姑娘,我与你无怨无仇,我不认识你啊,饶命吧”等等。此外,小说还有虚构彭家珍不正当男女关系的内容。@#
杂志社对小说《祸祟》的审稿情况在《稿件处理单》上有明确记载。初审意见是:一起巨额首饰诈骗案的背后隐藏着十分错综复杂的政治斗争,既有国际的,也有国内的。因此故事也就相当曲折、离奇,出入意外。作品真实的反映了国统时期的社会真实,文字简洁,文风朴实。题目可改、可留。复审意见是:同意以上的评介和意见,可以录用,但文字需要润饰,有多处生造词头,此外,题目应另拟,此题目不够大众化、不够通俗。终审意见是:诈骗手法似曾相识,但有可读性,同意以上意见。@#
2000年10月31日,杂志社收到彭家珍大将军专祠委员会(以下简称“彭家珍专祠”)和彭家祥等4位彭家珍烈士亲属对小说《祸祟》侵害彭家珍烈士名誉的交涉传真。杂志社得知情况后,立即责成小说的责任编辑与作者联系,并回复彭家珍专祠及彭家祥等人,告之正在处理所反映的问题。11月3日,杂志社派人分别赴天津、成都两地,向作者和彭家珍烈士亲属核对有关情况,得知作者周簧已经去世,小说《祸祟》存在着严重失实。对于错误刊登小说《祸祟》一事,杂志社作出如下决定:一、责令有关人员停职检查。二、在国内有关媒体上公开声明致歉。三、在《中国故事》上尽快刊登有关彭家珍烈士壮烈殉国的专稿,以正视听。同年11月14日,杂志社拟定了《郑重致歉》,全文为:“《中国故事》1998年第4期刊登的作品《祸祟》一文中,作者周簧对1912年1月26日晚炸死良弼,壮烈殉国,为孙中山、毛泽东所称颂的辛亥革命烈士彭家珍大将军之死,作了严重的歪曲史实的描写,对彭家珍烈士的名誉造成了重大伤害,也伤害了彭家珍烈士亲属的感情。作为登载该文的《中国故事》,我们对在审稿中造成的失误深感痛心并向彭家珍烈士及其亲属表示深深的歉意!”杂志社将该《郑重致歉》于2000年11月16日、11月19日、11月22日相继刊登于《武汉晚报》、《中国文化报》、《中国文物报》、《四川日报》和《成都晚报》。《中国故事》2001年第1期还登载了《义烈千秋——彭家珍大将军殉国纪实》专稿,并加了编者按。编者按全文为:“彭家珍,字席儒。1888年4月9日出生于四川金堂县姚渡乡(现为青白江区)。1906年在日本考察军事期间参加‘同盟会',回国后在成都、昆明、沈阳、天津、北京、上海等地从事反清革命活动。1912年1月26日,只身深入虎穴,掷炸弹诛锄清政府军咨府军咨使、宗社党首领良弼,本人也当场为国壮烈捐躯。我们摘登以下资料文字,以彰先烈英誉”。专稿包括4篇介绍彭家珍烈士的文章,同时还登载了1953年毛泽东主席签发的“革命牺牲军人家属光荣纪念证”及彭家珍烈士的照片。专稿之后再次用黑体字登载了《郑重致歉》全文,并声明:“凡持有《中国故事》1998年第4期的读者,请退我社销毁,其邮费、刊费由杂志社负担。”2001年2月3日,杂志社给“彭家珍专祠”及彭家祥等彭家珍烈士亲属发函,将有关处理情况作了通报,并表示希望达成谅解,妥善处理此事。@#
......


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 【¥600.00】 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