The report said recently, singer Lu Geng Qu and agent chat speak of Bai Baihe off the rails concerned content, be made public the dialog to report by the reporter, in carrying name of small letter public, lu Geng Qu thinks its chat as closely as the illicit between agent attribute individual private matters one wants to hide, should not report publicly wantonly and diffuse, and the ministry one's duty of the article allows as true as its meaning to state presence is very large discrepancy, serious misdirect masses.
Tell article author, Ning Ruichen the court, the requirement deletes an article, make an apology publicly, compensate for mental loss expenses to wait for more than yuan 1.15 million. Recently, in relief court of this case hold office at court is sessional, treasure of the accused peaceful luck expresses to interview content to belong to solid, geng Qu of different idea Lu appeals to beg.
On April 13, 2017 afternoon, ning Ruichen undertook an individual interview to its in some rehearse spot, and transcribe is relevant phonic video. On June 27, 2017, freak of date of small letter public appeared the problem is " what see Tsinghua talent additionally is proud with bias " article. On July 3, 2017, sina small gain " Freak " appeared same article, but thematic instead " Lu Geng Qu: I want reductive a true Gao Xiaosong " . Afore-mentioned two articles authors all are Ning Ruichen.
Lu Geng Qu thinks, the original intention that its stem from musical communication is accepted interview, but the accused lacks esteem to sufferring the person that visit, the article that compose publishs and video all exceed the content that interviews place to decide, misdirect masses, cause its society evaluation to reduce, already formed tort. Sue requirement the accused to delete article, video then, make an apology publicly, remove an effect, restore reputation, compensatory spirit damages pays expense of rational thought power 1 million yuan one hundred and fifty-five thousand two hundred yuan
To this, rejoin on two people court state lawsuit of different idea accuser requests, because of,saying to interview is of accuser invite what form about, interview content to be revealed be practical and realistic, objectively, open content does not involve privacy item, did not cause accuser society evaluation to reduce.
And the accused thinks, the both sides in covering a process did not agree make public what underground, "Propagandist period just puts forward afterwards, this is the hype of another kind of form in media. This is the hype of another kind of form in media..
