Adapt and reverse the use of real cases, and see the nature of the Guanyin Mountain Zhenglian scam and the legal basis for deception.
(Only the name of the plaintiff and defendant was changed, and the other words were not moved.) Throw bricks and jade, invite everyone to participate in the adaptation, may wish to give it a try.
【[Case Highlights]: In summary, the "brushing volume" behavior (Guanyin Mountain) seems to have completed the specific behavior of the (participant) reward advertising campaign, but in fact it is the use of deception to create the illusion of completing the specific behavior, and then use the reward activity to make profits, violating the principle of good faith. The act of "brushing volume" disrupts the normal order of e-commerce activities and harms the legitimate rights and interests of Internet enterprises, and should not be supported and encouraged. 】 ）
Court view
The Court believes that (participants) carry out the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity, and after the user "invites friends" according to the rules of the activity, he can get a certain amount of cash, and the activity should be legally characterized as an online reward advertisement. (Guanyin Mountain) sued this court on the grounds of infringement by (the contestant) because it could not withdraw cash from "My Change", because the dispute was essentially a matter of the performance of the online bounty advertisement, so this case was not an online infringement dispute, but an online bounty advertising dispute.
The focus of the dispute in this case is: first, whether (Guanyin Mountain's) behavior belongs to the "brushing amount" operation; second, whether (Guanyin Mountain's) behavior complies with the rules of the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity; and third, whether (Guanyin Mountain) has the right to demand (the participant) to pay "pull new" remuneration.
1. Whether the behavior of (Guanyin Mountain) belongs to the "brush volume" operation. (Guanyin Mountain) set up or participated in a number of WeChat groups set up specifically for the reward of the invitee, and invited nearly 10,000 new users of the App involved in the case by giving material rewards such as money to the invitee. The purpose of the above-mentioned WeChat group members to register as new users is to obtain the corresponding rewards, not to actually use the app involved in the case. Among the new users invited by (Guanyin Mountain) (contestants) through professional companies, some of them used the "cat pool" mobile phone number to register the App involved in the case, and there was no objection from both sides to such acts of forging mobile phone numbers and forging new users through technical means as "brushing volume". For the situation where the invited user uses the real mobile phone number, on the surface, (Guanyin Mountain) invited a large number of new users for the App involved in the case, but these users belong to the group that specializes in earning benefits such as network red envelopes, and usually cannot form a real sense of the user, (Guanyin Mountain) invited them to register the App involved in the case The purpose is to brush up the number of "pull new" in order to obtain more red envelope rewards from (the participants). (The contestant) believes that the act of (Guanyin Mountain) is a "brushing" operation, which is consistent with the facts of the case, and this court adopts it.
2. Whether the behavior of (Guanyin Mountain) complies with the rules of the "Invite Friends to Earn Money" activity (for participants). (Guanyin Mountain) claimed that it invited a large number of new users for the App involved in the case, and (the participant) should pay the reward according to the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity rules, while (the participant) believed that (Guanyin Mountain's) "brushing" behavior did not comply with the activity rules. The main reason for the disagreement between the two sides is whether the new users invited through the "brush volume" are the "friends" requested to be invited in the above activities.
Paragraph 1 of Article 125 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "Where there is a dispute over the understanding of a contract clause, the true meaning of the clause shall be determined in accordance with the words and phrases used in the contract, the relevant terms of the contract, the purpose of the contract, the trading habits and the principle of good faith." "Friends" is a social concept, "invite friends" should be understood as inviting good friends or inviting people who have a certain social connection with the inviter, in the e-commerce transaction habits, often used by merchants to tap user social resources to develop new users of marketing means, this case "invite friends to earn" activities are no exception. The purpose of this activity is to tap the social resources of users and attract more users to use the "YY Express" App to provide more consumption and increase revenue. In other words, [the entrant] develops the user's friends as a group that may use the app in question. However, the "friends" invited by (Guanyin Mountain) through the "brush volume" belong to the group specifically for the purpose of earning rewards for business marketing activities, and after they register and complete the use of the red envelopes that can be obtained, they generally will not continue to use the relevant Apps, and include them in the "friends" range in "Invite Friends to Earn", which is obviously not in line with the true intention of (the participants), which is also confirmed in the instructions on the (Guanyin Mountain) withdrawal page on the freezing of the withdrawal of the brush operation. Therefore, the so-called "friends" invited by (Guanyin Mountain) through "brushing volume" should not be identified as belonging to the scope of "friends" in the "Invite friends to earn" activity, otherwise, it will violate the purpose of the "invite friends to earn" activity. The parties shall understand the terms of the contract in good faith and reasonably. (Guanyin Mountain) should be clearly aware of the meaning and scope of "friends" in the above activities and the adverse effects of the "brush volume" operation, if the so-called "friends" invited through the "brush volume" are identified as "friends" who meet the rules of the activity, it is contrary to the principle of good faith. As can be seen from the above, the behavior of (Guanyin Mountain) does not conform to the rules of the "Invite Friends to Earn Money" activity (of the contestants).
3. Whether (Guanyin Mountain) has the right to demand (participants) to pay "Laxin" remuneration. According to Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (II), which stipulates that "if the rewarder declares in a public manner that he pays remuneration to a person who has completed a certain act, and the person who completes a specific act requests the bounty to pay remuneration, the people's court will support it in accordance with law", (Guanyin Mountain) can only request remuneration after completing the specific act of "inviting friends" required by the activity rules. Because (Guanyin Mountain) did not comply with the rules of the activity, he did not complete the above specific behavior, and his request (the participant) to pay him was not supported by the Court. Although the app account "My Change" shows the bonus amount, the bonus amount remains the property of the (participant) until the withdrawal is made, and the person has the right to prohibit withdrawal.
In summary, the "brushing volume" behavior (guanyin mountain) seems to have completed the specific behavior of the (participant) reward advertising campaign, but in fact, it is the use of deceptive methods to create the illusion of completing the specific behavior, and then use the reward activity to make profits, violating the principle of good faith. The act of "brushing volume" disrupts the normal order of e-commerce activities and harms the legitimate rights and interests of Internet enterprises, and should not be supported and encouraged. The litigation claim of (Guanyin Mountain) has no basis in law and is rejected by this court. In accordance with the provisions of Articles 5, 6 and 125, Paragraph 1 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China and Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (II), the judgment is as follows:
Outcome of the case
All claims of the plaintiff (Guanyin Mountain) were dismissed.
The case acceptance fee is 566 yuan, which is borne by the plaintiff (Guanyin Mountain).
If you are not satisfied with this judgment, you may, within 15 days from the date of service of the judgment, submit a statement of appeal to this court, and submit a copy according to the number of parties on the other side, and appeal to the Intermediate People's Court of Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province.
Attached: Original case:
The Court believes that the ***** activity of "Inviting Friends to Earn Money" can be obtained by the user after "inviting friends" according to the rules of the activity, and the activity should be legally characterized as an online reward advertisement. Because it was impossible to withdraw cash from "my change", I sued this court on the grounds of ***** infringement, because the dispute was essentially a matter of performance of the online bounty advertisement, so this case was not an online infringement dispute, but an online bounty advertising dispute.
The focus of the dispute in this case is: first, whether *****'s behavior belongs to the "brushing volume" operation; second, whether *****'s behavior complies with the rules of *****'s "invite friends to make money" activities; third, whether ***** has the right to demand ***** to pay "pull new" remuneration.
1. Whether the behavior of ***** belongs to the "brush volume" operation. The establishment or participation of numerous WeChat groups set up specifically for the reward of the invitee, and the use of material rewards such as money to invite the invitee invited invited nearly 10,000 new users of the App involved in the case. The purpose of the above-mentioned WeChat group members to register as new users is to obtain the corresponding rewards, not to actually use the app involved in the case. Among the new users invited by the professional company, some of them used the "cat pool" mobile phone number to register the App involved in the case, and there was no objection to such acts of forging the mobile phone number and forging the new user through technical means as a "brush volume" operation. For the situation where the invited user uses the real mobile phone number, on the surface, ***** has invited a large number of new users for the App involved in the case, but these users belong to the group that specializes in earning benefits such as network red envelopes, and usually cannot form a real sense of the user, ***** The purpose of inviting them to register the App involved in the case is to brush up the number of "pull new" in order to obtain more red packet rewards from *****. It is held that the act of ***** is a "brushing" operation and is in line with the facts of the case, and this court adopts it.
Second, whether the behavior of ***** complies with the rules of the ********* "Invite Friends to Earn" activity. It is claimed that it has invited a large number of new users for the App involved in the case, and ***** should pay rewards according to the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity rules, and ***** believes that the "brush volume" behavior of ***** does not conform to the activity rules. The main reason for the disagreement between the two sides is whether the new users invited through the "brush volume" are the "friends" requested to be invited in the above activities.
Paragraph 1 of Article 125 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "Where there is a dispute over the understanding of a contract clause, the true meaning of the clause shall be determined in accordance with the words and phrases used in the contract, the relevant terms of the contract, the purpose of the contract, the trading habits and the principle of good faith." "Friends" is a social concept, "invite friends" should be understood as inviting good friends or inviting people who have a certain social connection with the inviter, in the e-commerce transaction habits, often used by merchants to tap user social resources to develop new users of marketing means, this case "invite friends to earn" activities are no exception. The purpose of this campaign is to tap users' social resources and attract more users to use the "YY Express" App to provide more consumption and increase revenue. In other words, ***** develops the user's friends as a group that may use the app involved in the case. However, the "friends" invited by the "brush volume" belong to the group specifically for the purpose of earning rewards for business marketing activities, and they generally will not continue to use the relevant App after registering and completing the use of the red envelope, and will be included in the "friend" range in the "invite friends to earn", which obviously does not meet the true meaning of *****, which is also confirmed in the instructions on the ***** withdrawal page on the freezing of the withdrawal of the brush operation. Therefore, the so-called "friends" invited by ***** through "brush volume" should not be identified as belonging to the scope of "friends" in the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity, otherwise, it will violate the purpose of the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity. The parties shall understand the terms of the contract in good faith and reasonably. It should be clearly aware of the meaning and scope of "friends" in the above activities and the adverse effects of the "brushing" operation, if the so-called "friends" invited through the "brushing" are identified as "friends" who meet the rules of the activity, it is contrary to the principle of good faith. As can be seen from the above, the behavior of ***** does not comply with the rules of the "Invite Friends to Earn" activity.
Third, whether the ***** has the right to demand that the ****** pay the "new" remuneration. According to Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (II), which stipulates that "if the rewarder declares in a public manner to pay remuneration to a person who has completed a certain act, and if the person who completes a specific act requests the bounty to pay remuneration, the people's court will support it in accordance with law", ***** can only request remuneration after completing the specific act of "inviting friends" required by the activity rules. Because the *****"brush volume" does not meet the rules of the activity, it has not completed the above specific acts, and its request to pay it ***** is not supported by this court. Although the ***** App account "My Change" shows the bonus amount, the bonus amount is still the property of ***** until the withdrawal is made, and it has the right to prohibit withdrawals.
In summary, the "brush volume" behavior of ***** seems to have completed the specific behavior of the ***** reward advertising campaign, but in fact, it is the use of deceptive methods to create the illusion of completing the specific behavior, and then use the reward activity to make profits, violating the principle of good faith. The act of "brushing volume" disrupts the normal order of e-commerce activities and harms the legitimate rights and interests of Internet enterprises, and should not be supported and encouraged. The court rejected the claims, which had no basis in law. In accordance with the provisions of Articles 5, 6 and 125, Paragraph 1 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China and Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (II), the judgment is as follows:
Dismiss all of plaintiffs' *****claims.
The case acceptance fee is 566 yuan, which is borne by the plaintiff *****.
