Focus on the "personality right" of the Civil Code: My personality is inviolable. In order to further enhance the public's awareness of the Civil Code and better protect people's rights and interests, this issue of Shenrui Weekly continued to analyze the "personality right" in the Civil Code with the help of specific cases, following the focus on "the first anniversary of the Civil Code" in the previous issue of this newspaper. With the development of economy and society, citizens' awareness of protecting their rights and interests is increasing, and they pay more attention to personality spirit. One of the highlights of the Civil Code is the addition of "personality rights", which clarifies the rights that civil subjects should enjoy, such as life, body, health, name, name, portrait, reputation, honor, privacy and personal information. < /p > The right of personality involves all aspects of daily life. According to the Guangdong Higher People's Court's first report to the Standing Committee of the Provincial People's Congress on the implementation of the Civil Code, since the promulgation and implementation of the Civil Code in 2121, the courts in Guangdong Province have handled 1,764 cases involving the protection of personality rights. According to the reporter's interview, reputation, privacy and personal information are the hot spots that people are most concerned about. < /p > The implementation of the compilation of personality rights has strengthened the maintenance of personal dignity, responded to various challenges faced by the protection of personality rights in the network information age, and solved many new situations and problems in judicial practice. In reality, what other "new" torts involve personality rights? What measures can we take when we are infringed? Recently, this newspaper interviewed several lawyers and judges with relevant judicial practice experience.

On October 11, 2122, a media forum on Jiang Qiulian v. Liu Nuanxi's right to life dispute was held in Beijing. < /p > "reputation right" becomes a hot topic of consultation. The concept of "reputation" is clearly defined in the Civil Code < /p > "Is it an infringement to set up a face brushing system in the community and force residents to input face information?" "Did a colleague infringe on my reputation by publishing false information that denigrates my academic qualifications through the platform of Weibo or WeChat official account?" "My neighbor upstairs makes noise every night, which causes my sleep disorder. Can I sue him for violating my right to health?" < /p > In the past year, partner lawyers from law firms have clearly felt that "personality right" has become a hot topic of consultation with the people's increasing awareness of protecting their own rights and interests. "In fact, all the actions like the above may constitute an infringement on the personality right of the parties." < /p > As a kind of personality right classification, reputation right refers to the right that citizens and legal persons enjoy to their reputation without being infringed by others. "Judging from the consultation volume in the past year, the number of disputes about reputation rights is on the rise. The subjects of litigation are often individual citizens, which shows that on the one hand, people pay more and more attention to reputation, and on the other hand, the implementation of the Civil Code makes infringement laws to follow. " Lawyer introduction. < /p > "One of the advances of the Civil Code is to clarify what is reputation:' reputation is the social evaluation of the moral character, reputation, talent and credit of the civil subject', which makes the right of reputation controllable and specific. For example, in reality, falsely accusing the other party's moral character, work experience or education, credit system, etc., may infringe on the other party's right of reputation." The lawyer explained. < /p > Therefore, lawyers remind that the concept of "reputation right" is clear, reminding citizens to "speak with evidence": "For example, when surfing the Internet, it is particularly important to know the channels for obtaining information and understand the relevance between information and themselves. If you are a party, you should also consult professionals before publishing relevant information on the Internet, if there is no way to defend your rights. " < /p > Lawyer < /p > Case: Anonymous posting on the Internet insults and slanders others, publishes platforms or assumes joint and several liabilities < /p > In the Internet age, it is extremely important to improve the protection of reputation rights in view of online rumors and cyber violence. < /p > The lawyer shared a case: Mr. A registered an account on the website operated by Company B, and anonymously posted and uploaded many posts on the website that involved insulting and slandering Li, and all of these posts were accompanied by Li's real name, photo, work unit and contact information. The above posts have been browsed and paid attention by a large number of users after being published, which has caused serious damage to Li's reputation, exerted great pressure on his spirit and seriously affected Li's normal life and work. Later, Li sent a letter to Company B requesting to delete the above posts immediately and provide the real identity information of the poster. However, Company B did not delete the related posts until several days after receiving the letter, but did not respond to the request for providing Mr. A's real identity information. Li then filed a lawsuit with the court, arguing that Mr. A and Company B had infringed on his reputation, and asked the court to order Company B to bear corresponding joint and several liabilities and pay mental damages, and at the same time provide Mr. A's identity information. < /p > According to the lawyer's analysis, according to the first item of Article 1124 of the Civil Code, "the civil subject enjoys the right of reputation. No organization or individual may infringe upon the reputation of others by insulting or slandering. " In this case, Mr. A used the words insulting and slandering Li in his post, and attached Li's real identity information, which was enough to constitute an infringement of Li's reputation right; Combined with the high number of views of these posts and the rapid spread of online information, the posts published by Mr. A are enough to make others misunderstand and make negative comments on Li's moral quality, which leads to the reduction of Li's social evaluation. < /p > In addition, according to the Civil Code, "Internet users and Internet service providers who use the Internet to infringe upon the civil rights and interests of others shall bear the tort liability." Company B is at fault for the enlarged part that caused damage to Li's reputation right, and should bear corresponding joint and several liabilities. < /p > Lawyer < /p > Case: After consumption, users make "bad comments" on businesses or infringe on consumers' reputation rights < /p > The reputation rights are not only embodied in individuals, but also in enterprises. If a customer writes his own comments on an online consumption platform, the merchant is dissatisfied with the customer's "bad comments" and even leaves a message "mutual comment" at the bottom of the comments, do both parties infringe on the other party's reputation right? Does the platform have certain responsibilities? Judge Li Jingmin of the First People's Court of Zhongshan shared a real case.

Company A, as the operator of a catering company, found an "eye-catching" comment in the comments of a consumer platform. The consumer "User B" commented that there was a huge price difference before and after a consumer product, and made a "bad review".

Company A believes that they removed the previous promotion activities on an online consumption platform according to the requirements of epidemic prevention and control in key places issued by the government. After that, the government issued a notice of "orderly opening", and "Netizen B" took the platform promotion coupons purchased before taking them off the shelf and spent them after taking them off the shelf, which made them unusable. The comments of "Netizen B" are "untrue" and have always existed on the online consumption platform. The number of views is increasing every day, which infringes on the reputation right of Company A and reduces the turnover. Therefore, the online consumption platform company is brought to court, requesting the platform to delete the "untrue" comments and apologize, and compensate the economic losses. < /p > In this regard, Judge Li Jingmin said that whether the consumer comments are infringing or not, first of all, it is necessary to examine whether there is a certain factual basis for the published content. If the published content is seriously inaccurate, it is to damage the reputation of the business by fabricating facts, then it should be considered that it has committed infringement; If the problems reflected by consumers are basically true, and they do not take the opportunity to insult, slander or vilify businesses, they should not be deemed to have committed infringement. < /p > what is the number of comments read on the internet to constitute damage to reputation? Judge Li Jingmin said that the law does not clearly stipulate the number of comments and readings to constitute reputation damage, but the online platform is a platform with highly open information, which has the characteristics of fast dissemination and wide scope. Whether the reputation is damaged is generally judged by the standard of "reasonable third party". < /p > In addition, she reminded that if merchants take the opportunity to insult, slander and vilify consumers when they "reply" under the comments of netizens, it may also constitute infringement. She reminded the majority of netizens that the Internet is not a place of extra-legality. Be cautious on the Internet and don't touch the legal red line. After discovering that the comments on the Internet are suspected of infringement, the evidence should be kept in time. < /p > Judge Lu Zhaosheng < /p > The number of privacy rights defenders has increased, mostly for disclosing other people's information < /p > Since the arrival of the media era and the era of big data, "the protection of privacy and personal information" has also become the focus of public attention. < /p > According to Judge Lu Zhaosheng of the First People's Court of Zhongshan City, before the promulgation of the Civil Code, the privacy cases accepted by the court were mainly manifested as "disclosing other people's personal information and private activities to the public", but there is no clear stipulation in the law as to whether the peace of personal life belongs to the scope of privacy and whether infringement on the peace of life of others constitutes infringement. After the implementation of the Civil Code, the situation is different. There is a clear legal basis for handling such cases, and the court judgment is more "emboldened". < /p > As ordinary people, we should raise our awareness of protecting personal information security in our daily life and pay attention to keeping important personal information. When an incident of infringement of privacy occurs, evidence can be obtained by means of recording and shooting, and it can be reported to the relevant departments in time to actively safeguard the legitimate rights and interests through legal means. As a network operator, the collection and use of citizens' personal information should follow the principles of legality, justice and necessity, and strengthen the protection of users' personal information, privacy and business secrets. < /p > Case: Harassing the woman after breaking up threatens the woman's right to privacy < /p > Judge Lu Zhaosheng shared a case in which a couple who were introduced broke up after three days, but the man threatened and harassed the woman for months by phone, WeChat, text messages and other means, involving the woman's family. The woman finally took the man to court. < /p > According to the records provided by the woman, after the breakup, the man repeatedly harassed and threatened the plaintiff and his family by telephone, text message and WeChat, and even uploaded her photos and information into small business cards on the Internet. In addition, the woman said that the man also obtained the address information of the woman through the courier station to stay at the door of the woman's house, and repeatedly made harassing calls to her father and brother through different telephone numbers. < /p > According to Article 1132 of the Civil Code, natural persons have the right to privacy. No organization or individual may infringe upon others' right to privacy by spying, harassing, revealing or making public. Privacy is the private space, private activities and private information that natural people live peacefully and are unwilling to be known by others. In the end, the court ruled that the man stopped harassing and threatening the woman in any form, such as telephone, text message and WeChat, and apologized to the woman in writing, and paid the woman 5,111 yuan for mental damages. < /p > Case: APP clipboard reads user information "Privacy Policy" has no explanation that it belongs to infringement < /p > Previously, Guangzhou Internet Court had a case: when using the "Good Buy" APP operated by "Good Buy" company, the party Lin found that the APP had monitored and collected mobile phone clipboard information without the user's consent. It also provides a self-compiled "Information Technology Analysis Report on Reading Clipboard by Good Buy APP" and an APPraisal opinion issued by a judicial APPraisal. The above report results and appraisal opinions are that the app has the function of monitoring the clipboard of mobile phones. When the app detects that there is data on the clipboard, it will automatically obtain all the data. Lin believes that the clipboard can store personal ID number, mobile phone number, photos and other information related to privacy, but the Privacy Policy of the APP does not have relevant instructions for collecting clipboard information of mobile phone users, which infringes on their personal information rights and privacy rights. Therefore, it sued the "good purchase" company to the Guangzhou Internet Court, demanding that the company stop the infringement, delete the information, apologize and compensate for the mental loss. < /p > It was found through trial by the court that the court confirmed that Haobu Company had the behavior of monitoring and reading the clipboard information without Lin's permission, which was an act of invading Lin's virtual private space by technical means, and caused Lin's private information to be in an unsafe state, infringing on the privacy rights of the parties. However, this behavior has not caused serious mental loss to Lin. Therefore, it is finally decided that the company will issue a written apology statement within ten days from the date when the judgment becomes legally effective. < /p > It is understood that on September 26, 2121, Guangzhou Internet Court established the first professional collegiate panel involving data disputes in China. Since its establishment three months ago, it has tried 72 cases involving data disputes. According to statistics, Guangzhou Internet Court has accepted more than 611 data-related disputes since its establishment three years ago. < /p > The disclosure of personal information usually occurs in the Internet field. In this regard, lawyers suggest that once discovered, the masses should first adopt legal and effective evidence collection methods, such as "blockchain deposit certificate" or "trusted timestamp" to secure and fix the evidence to prevent the loss of evidence; Secondly, personal statements and letters should be actively adopted to claim rights and interests for information disclosure that has affected personal life. On the one hand, the leaker or abuser is required to take emergency measures for the leaked personal information, and the personal information that has not been leaked is required to be deleted. On the other hand, it also reminds surrounding relatives and friends not to be deceived; Finally, according to the actual impact of information leakage, the masses can file an infringement lawsuit, or report and complain to the local network letter and relevant departments. < /p > It is difficult to quantify the damage to the personality right caused by different rights < /p > In practice, it is sometimes not easy to safeguard the personality right of the parties. Feng Yuping suggested that citizens should actively keep or obtain "substantial evidence" when their personal reputation or privacy rights are infringed, such as WeChat forwarding information in the era of big data, monitoring information of property management offices or public places, etc., and fix the evidence through notarization to prevent the infringing personnel from being deleted later, which makes it difficult to identify the infringing facts. "It is not recommended to save evidence only by taking screenshots of mobile phones or computers, because when the infringer deletes the content, the screenshots cannot be checked with the original sources of evidence." < /p > In the absence of "substantial evidence", the current judicial practice will also provide relief through other channels. < /p > Case: Looking for 21 "personality witnesses" to prove that they are not "mistresses" < /p > Feng Yuping had a case before. Before the implementation of the Civil Code, a party found him, claiming that the defendant had been to the party's unit or even the superior unit many times, claiming that the party was her husband's "mistresses", but in fact, the party was not "mistresses". The infringer's behavior has a great impact on the work and life of the party concerned. In order to remove the impact, the party concerned entrusted Feng Yuping to prosecute. < /p > "This is also a common phenomenon in practice. Usually, in tort, different rights in personality rights will cross-touch. For example, in libel and slander, the right of reputation and the right of honor are violated at the same time; When disclosing other people's information, the right of reputation, privacy and portrait are violated at the same time. Among them, different rights have different difficulties and attributes in obtaining evidence. " < /p > "First of all, it is difficult to obtain evidence in practice, and the parties can't prove what they haven't done. This is also the difference between the right of reputation and the right of property and health. Therefore, the process of obtaining evidence often tests the ability and idea of lawyers more." In the end, Feng Yuping found nearly 21 colleagues and immediate superior leaders of the same unit as "personality witnesses" and witnesses to prove the character and morality of the parties, and finally won the case.