IT Home February 9 news, Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court issued a document today, Glory Company v. a certain evaluation blogger infringement of the right to reputation case judgment, evaluation blogger compensation Glory company 86698 yuan.
According to reports, Xiao jiang (pseudonym) is a Weibo plus V user with 100,000 + fans, the user name is "Xiao Jiang Evaluation (pseudonym)", and his Weibo account is certified as a "digital blogger". From February to May 2021, Xiaojiang posted a series of reviews on his Weibo for honor V40, Play5t, Play 20 and x7 tablets.
Honor Terminal Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Honor Company) believes that Xiaojiang has a large network influence in the digital circle, and its continuous publication of content that defames and defames Glory products has seriously infringed on Glory's right to reputation, so it sued the court, demanding that Xiaojiang immediately delete the infringing content involved in the case, apologize and compensate for economic losses of 1 million yuan and reasonable expenses of 76698 yuan for rights protection.
During the trial, Xiaojiang confirmed that he had not conducted an actual evaluation of the glory products described on Weibo.
The Guangzhou Internet Court ruled in the first instance that Xiaojiang issued an apology statement at the top of the home page of his Weibo account, apologizing to Glory Company, eliminating the influence and restoring its reputation for Glory Company; Xiao Jiang compensated Glory Company for economic losses of 60,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of 26,698 yuan, a total of 86,698 yuan; and rejected Glory's other litigation claims.
The parties did not appeal and the judgment came into force.
IT Home learned that the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court said that Xiaojiang is a Weibo plus V user with more than 100,000 fans, is an active Weibo user, and Weibo is certified as a "digital blogger", and the digital product information he publishes on Weibo will attract the attention of fans or other network users.
When Xiao Jiang published the reprinted Weibo, he did not present the original content completely and objectively, and there was a malicious splicing of other user comments and selectively quoting derogatory remarks in the reprinted articles.
In addition, there is no objective basis for the original Weibo content involved in the case. As a "digital blogger", Xiaojiang's Weibo remarks about digital products are not published through his own evaluation or experience of products, nor have they been properly verified.