Recently, Tesla sued Douyin big V Cai boss and claimed 5 million caused a hot discussion, some netizens believe that Tesla's high claim of 5 million is somewhat unkind, but is this really the case?
The cause of the incident dates back to a year ago, when Boss Cai posted a video with the theme of "One of my Tesla supplier friends exposed the relevant insiders" through his Douyin account. Boss Cai said in this video that one of his friends is one of Tesla's suppliers, and according to his friend, Tesla has had a series of violations in cooperation with suppliers after localization.
However, Boss Cai did not provide any evidence in the video to support the authenticity of his description. Tesla also complained about the content of Boss Cai, and "Boss Cai" said that the above content belonged to the revelations of friends, and it was impossible for him to ask this "friend" to testify for himself, and even said that he "forgot" the name of this friend under great pressure.
Such an answer inevitably makes netizens suspect that a series of remarks by Boss Cai may be "out of nothing".
Perhaps having mastered sufficient evidence, this year Tesla once again sued Boss Cai in court, demanding that Boss Cai stop the infringement and delete the infringing content; publicly apologize in writing, and place a top on the relevant platform for no less than 90 days; and pay 5 million yuan in infringement damages;
Boss Cai also released a video in recent days, revealing his own prosecution by Tesla, and said that he was "really scared" and "too stressed".
The "weak" person setting up for Boss Cai has won the sympathy of many netizens, and some netizens believe that Tesla's move is too tough. Today we will analyze, tesla claim 5 million is reasonable?
The $5 million compensation is not exclusive to Tesla
In the era of mobile Internet, everyone can become self-media, and the dissemination of news has become more convenient and rapid. But this also means that the entry threshold of self-media has become infinitely low, the ability of content creators is uneven, and most content creators do not understand the norms of news dissemination, nor do they know what the consequences of their irresponsible words and deeds will bring.
The disadvantages brought about by this phenomenon are that rumor-mongering, infringement and other acts are emerging in an endless stream, and the number of disputes over the right to reputation between enterprises and self-media has exploded.
Perhaps because tesla brings its own traffic, people only pay attention to Tesla-related reputation infringement cases, but in fact, in recent years, disputes over the right to reputation between car companies and self-media abound, and the amount of claims is not a small amount.
Weilai, a new car-making force, has also claimed 5 million yuan in compensation from the self-media. In November 2019, Liu Yue, the owner of the self-media "Shijie", published an article entitled "WEILAI Automobile is negotiating bankruptcy liquidation with a number of law firms", which had a great negative impact on WEILAI Automobile. Subsequently, Weilai Automobile filed a lawsuit against Liu Yue, demanding a public apology and claiming 5 million yuan. In the end, the court sentenced Liu Yue, the owner of the self-media "Shijie", to compensate WEILAI for infringement losses of 300,000 yuan and publicly apologized for 90 days.
Traditional car company Great Wall Motors has had a similar experience. In January 2020, Great Wall Motors informed mingjia self-media "Big Drag Racing" that the court supported it, and the court ordered Sumei Weishang Company (the parent company of Big Drag Racing) to delete all false internal uses of Great Wall Motors on the Internet and "publish a statement for ten consecutive days to eliminate the impact"; in addition, the defendant Sumei Weishang Company compensated Great Wall for economic losses of 1 million yuan and rights protection costs of 55,520 yuan.
It is understood that from June 2017. The self-media "Big Drag Racing" released the title "Great Wall VV7" in its WeChat public account, Weibo, Chejia number and other platforms with the title "Great Wall VV7 This car has 'poison', and the formaldehyde content on the floor directly explodes!" "The wiring harness is messy and formaldehyde exceeds the standard, and the outstanding representative of the Great Wall VV7 'face' project" and other articles and videos. This led to subsequent prosecutions.
Just in January not long ago, in front of a BYD 4S store, a car spontaneously ignited the vehicle next to it, some netizens said that it was caused by the spontaneous combustion of BYD electric vehicles, in this regard, the BYD Network Reporting Center issued a document saying that this rumor is seriously inconsistent with the facts, it is a rumor, it has seriously infringed on the legitimate rights and interests of BYD, for which a case has been filed, and requires the relevant infringers to publicly apologize and pay 1 million yuan in compensation.
It can be seen from these cases that not only Tesla, car companies will not be soft on rumor-mongers, for these big car companies, compensation itself may not be important, but the losses caused by rumors to enterprises are irreparable, car companies need to strictly investigate the responsibility of rumor-mongers, to warn irresponsible self-media, to avoid the emergence of more rumors to cause losses to enterprises.
Compensation is linked to actual losses, and severe punishment of rumor-mongering helps to regulate the chaos of self-media
So back to the amount of the claim, is there any basis for car companies including Tesla, Weilai, ANDD to claim high compensation? Is 5 million reasonable?
In this regard, some lawyers said that the enterprise's claim for defamation infringement must be directly related to the impact of the incident, and the key point is the adequacy of the respective information of the two parties.
We take the Tesla Shanghai Auto Show incident as an example, for the Shanghai Auto Show "rights protection" parties, Tesla also put forward a claim of 5 million yuan.
According to anecdotal news, the losses caused by the "Shanghai Auto Show Incident" to Tesla are conservatively estimated to be more than 170 million yuan, of which the direct economic loss is more than 120 million yuan and the loss of goodwill is more than 50 million yuan.
For the reason why Boss Cai's remarks have brought much damage to Tesla, there is no public data support for the time being, but Boss Cai has more than 2 million fans on the platform of Douyin alone, and the social influence is huge, and it is conservatively estimated that its impact on Tesla should be far more than 5 million, perhaps for Tesla, the claim of 5 million is already sparing.
However, before the court's judgment, whether Boss Cai constitutes infringement cannot be determined for the time being. Some fans of Boss Cai claimed that Tesla deliberately increased the amount of the claim, resulting in high legal fees for the defendants. Boss Cai also alluded in his video that he and Tesla spent a lot of money fighting a lawsuit.
In this regard, the lawyer pointed out that in the process of ordinary consumers and enterprises fighting lawsuits, the lawyer's fees have little to do with the plaintiff's claim amount, and more importantly, the defendant and the lawyer agree on their own according to the difficulty of the case. General lawyers' trade associations also have certain requirements for lawyers' fees, and lawyers must not arbitrarily collect fees. It is rumored that "the defendant's legal fees are charged as a percentage of the plaintiff's claim amount, and the plaintiff may deliberately increase the amount of the claim, thereby increasing the defendant's legal fees and putting pressure on the defendant." This statement is inappropriate.
Therefore, no matter how high a claim is filed by an enterprise, it is reasonable to prove that its loss is directly related to the impact of the event.
As far as the melon-eating masses are concerned, we should support enterprises to severely punish rumor-mongers, the masses and enterprises are both victims, and rumor-mongering behavior not only harms the interests of enterprises, but also misleads the majority of netizens, and rumor-mongers do not deserve sympathy. On the contrary, if the cost of violating the law is too low, it will not play its due deterrent effect, and it will be easy to promote the bad atmosphere of rumor-mongering and touching porcelain, and it will be ourselves who will eventually be used as "cannon fodder" by unscrupulous self-media.