In view of the fuzziness of the meaning of emoji, how to interpret and identify the meaning of emoji on the Internet has really become a challenge for the judiciary in the Internet age.

On February 28th, Tencent official Weibo said: Quit smoking? . Immediately, many WeChat users found that Minions, wearing a green helmet, had dropped his cigar. Soon, this news quickly rushed to several hot search lists and became the focus of public opinion.

Recently, under the huge user base, almost every seemingly insignificant adjustment has produced quite eye-catching results. People talk about the setting, meaning and use of WeChat characters. And those expressions born in the virtual world, while being more and more integrated into users' lives, also appear in judicial documents such as court judgments in many places, becoming? Testify in court? Part of.

Those online terms written into the judgment

On the China refereeing document online, the reporter searched several related cases.

For example, in a civil judgment issued by the Intermediate People's Court of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, a judgment was made on a contract dispute case involving WeChat expressions.

As a creator, Lu Hong sent his lyrics to Tian Min, the legal representative of Shenzhen Yi Dao Film Group Co., Ltd. on April 24th, 20th/KLOC-0th/8th. After the latter indicated that he was on his way, he sent a WeChat emoji [strong].

Based on the chat between the two parties, the court of first instance held that the WeChat emoji [Qiang] was not an approval of the lyrics, but a polite reply, which could not be used as the basis for the delivered lyrics to meet the requirements of the litigation contract? The above judgment is written like this.

In the judgment of another private lending case, the lender Zhang Huifeng sent a WeChat to the borrower Yan Hao, listing the details of the latter's loan. Yan Hao back to an expression? Okay？ .

This emoji means approval in Zhang Huifeng's view, but Yan Hao said: This? Okay？ It's not that I don't recognize Zhang Huifeng's WeChat content.

The People's Court of Taihe County, Anhui Province held that the WeChat record submitted by Zhang Huifeng had not been confirmed by Yan Haoming, so the content of WeChat could not be used as the basis for the latter to owe Zhang Huifeng corresponding money.

Compared with the WeChat expressions in the above two judgments, the meanings of other expressions are vague.

For example, in the judgment of a house lease dispute case, after the lease expires, the lessee repeatedly reminded the lessor of the intention to increase the rent, which did not mean to continue to lease or move out of the property involved, but only replied. The sun? Emoji.

In the lessor's view, this? The sun? Emoji means agreeing to increase rent. However, the lessee believes that this determination has no factual and legal basis.

The Intermediate People's Court of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province finally supported the lessor's opinion and thought that the lessee should be deemed to agree to continue renting according to the standard after the rent rose. At the same time, the lessee is judged to bear the corresponding housing occupation fee and use fee after the lease expires.

It is worth noting that Yan characters also appear in some judicial documents of criminal cases.

The reporter saw the second trial criminal judgment organized by Zhu Zhixiang, Deng Hongwei, Peng Fen and other organizations on the China Judgment Document Online. It says: Liu et al? After prostitution, I repeatedly sent a smile to Zhu Zhixiang's micro-signal, etc. .

The judicial organs are faced with the problem of how to identify the meaning of network expression.

As a scholar who studies online expressions, Hu Ling, associate professor and vice president of the School of Law of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, pointed out in an interview: With the popularity of instant messaging software, people use online expressions more and more to express their attitudes, and online expressions appear in court as evidence more and more frequently.

Hu Ling said that in most cases in China, online expression usually only appears as auxiliary evidence, not decisive. However, in view of the ambiguity of the meaning of emoji, how to interpret and identify the meaning of emoji on the Internet has indeed become a challenge for the judiciary in the Internet age.

Hu Ling introduced that American scholars are ahead in the research of network expression. Eric, a law professor at Santa Clara University, USA? Goldman Sachs wrote in a paper: From 2004 to 20 19, the frequency of emoticons and symbolic expressions appearing in court evidence increased year by year, and in recent years it has increased exponentially.

In a paper entitled "Law" (Yang), it is mentioned that Internet-related cases in the United States mainly focus on criminal offences, intellectual property rights and other fields. In addition, Yan characters are increasingly appearing in exchanges involving illegal activities such as drug trafficking or prostitution. The author thinks: this kind? Metonymy? It needs to be taken seriously by the court when the evidence is determined.

The above paper gives an example: in 20 19, in a case heard by the California court of appeal, the prosecutor tried to prove that a man was arrested in the process of prostitution? Pimp? One of the evidences is that men send it to women? Teamwork makes dreams come true? Information. Was this message written by Yan Wen? High heels? And then what? A bag of money? Composition.

Internet manifestations of discrimination and sexual harassment in the United States

Unlike the situation in China, Yang pointed out in his paper that online speech cases in the United States are often related to discrimination and sexual harassment.

If the unit director is willing? Dinosaurs? Sending emoticons to employees who are about to retire may be considered as discrimination and be claimed; Between colleagues, if there is a seemingly harmless fruit symbol (such as corncob) or? Kissing? Emoji, there may be complaints about sexual harassment or creating an unfriendly working environment.

Yang believes that judging from some domestic online cases, the value attached by the judiciary may affect the trend of the case. At the same time, he suggested that in the ruling, the court should be encouraged to add actual words to its opinions when possible, rather than just expressing them in words.