Current location - Recipe Complete Network - Dietary recipes - What do you think of the "Bird's Nest Incident" and the final ruling of Simba?
What do you think of the "Bird's Nest Incident" and the final ruling of Simba?
The "Bird's Nest Incident" finally ruled that Simba won the case, which is still a warning and lesson for Simba.

Although Guangzhou Rongyu Trading Co., Ltd. intentionally misleads Simba's companies, in fact, Simba and its companies still have certain faults. It is they who "put dishes on the plate" and shouted at fake bird's nest, which eventually led to many consumers being deceived.

In recent years, live broadcast with goods has become a new way of selling goods, but live broadcast with goods also frequently causes right and wrong. A prominent problem is that some online celebrity "bring" fake and shoddy goods, which infringes on consumers' interests, disrupts market order and hinders social harmony. Therefore, for online celebrity, we should consciously reject fake and inferior commodities and prevent ourselves from being used as a gun by others.

Simba can definitely be called the top online celebrity. The above-mentioned incident is a wake-up call and a lesson, reminding Simba to be cautious when carrying goods online, not to "tell the difference" and to be serious and responsible for any commercial behavior. We expect Simba to go further in the online world and have his own "poetry and distance".

The "Simba Bird's Nest Incident" has undergone a substantial "reversal"

Recently, the Guangzhou Arbitration Commission made a final ruling on the case of Shuyang Heyi Information Co., Ltd. (a subsidiary of Xinxuan Group, hereinafter referred to as Heyi Company) v. Guangzhou Rongyu Trading Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Rongyu Company): it confirmed that Rongyu Company deliberately misled Xinxuan to make false and misleading propaganda, and ruled that Rongyu Company paid compensation to Heyi Company and compensated the losses.

This means that the "Simba Bird's Nest Incident" that happened last year 1 1 month took a substantial "reversal" after a lapse of seven months. Although the incident did not happen in the live broadcast room of Simba, the anchor with goods, it was once misunderstood by public opinion as "Simba made fake and sold fake goods", and this ruling finally confirmed the truth.