At 9 o'clock, the judge announced the opening of the court and read the verdict. The court confirmed that Wang admitted to having an "extramarital affair" with Dong at the trial stage of the case. The court held that China's marriage law stipulates that husband and wife should be faithful to each other. According to Wang's confession in court and the agreement between Wang and Jiang's parents, it can be concluded that Wang did have an unfair relationship with Dong, an outsider in the case, and Wang's behavior violated the law. According to Jiang's diary, Jiang suffered great harm and mental pain. This behavior of Wang not only violated the law, but also deviated from the social moral norms, and the court criticized it.
At the same time, the judge said that after Wang's infidelity was disclosed, it caused criticism and dissatisfaction from many netizens. Using the disclosed information, netizens began to use' human flesh search' on other websites to actively search for more personal information about Wang, and even there were serious consequences that many netizens harassed Wang's family, which constituted infringement. The court finally confirmed that the migratory birds in Beifei constituted infringement and compensated Wang for the loss of spiritual comfort totaling 8,000 yuan.
Analysis: Human flesh search is actually a way for netizens to interact through the network platform and collect information provided by a large number of participants, so as to obtain the final search results. This process is obviously inseparable from the information exchange platform of the website. However, whether the website will bear joint and several legal responsibilities. To analyze specific problems:
1. For an ISP (network service provider) that only provides BBS, blog and other communication platforms, there will be subjective fault and joint liability only if it knows that the content infringes the rights of others or does not delete the infringing content after receiving a complaint from the right holder. Many human flesh search cases occurred before Tianya, because the related posts were deleted in time, the website did not bear legal responsibility. Last year, Zhang Keke sued Tianya for reputation infringement and lost the case, which is similar to this case and can be used as a reference. (According to the reporter, Tianya deleted the related posts shortly after the plaintiff negotiated with Tianya; Migratory birds flying in the north also locked the ID of two netizens and warned them. )
2. For those ICP (Internet Information Service Providers) who regard the relevant content as their own website content and have editors to edit it, they have the responsibility to carefully verify the content. If they publish infringing information because they have not fulfilled their duty of care, they should bear legal responsibility.
The protection of privacy and reputation rights involved in this case is a very sensitive topic in the industry. There are few laws and regulations on privacy protection in China. The General Principles of Civil Law only stipulates the right to life and health, the right to name, the right to name, the right to portrait, the right to reputation, the right to honor and other personality rights, but does not make relevant provisions on the right to privacy. 1988 the Supreme People's Court adopted the indirect protection method in the Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of the Civil Law, stipulating that infringement of others' privacy and damage to the right of reputation shall be deemed as infringement of the right of reputation and civil liability shall be investigated. In this way, the right of privacy becomes a subordinate concept of the right of reputation, which is actually inappropriate.
In addition to the positioning of privacy, the relevant laws have adopted a vague approach to the basic issues such as what privacy is, the scope of privacy, and the way to protect privacy, which has become the source of controversy about whether websites and netizens have violated the plaintiff's privacy in this case.
Here we have to admit that the law is not omnipotent. The guidance of law to social life is usually just a "bottom line", and morality plays an important role in the process of adjusting people's social life. As Faye Wong's lawyer said, Faye Wong's extramarital affairs and divorce are not against the law. This does not mean that the law encourages and advocates this kind of behavior, and this kind of behavior should also be condemned by morality.
If Faye Wong's extramarital affairs and the information disclosed by netizens are true, then just because his extramarital affairs are revealed, he should be responsible for his low social evaluation.