Because be in company of Baidu net dispatch of operation " date of a hunderd schools " reach byte of jumpy company operation " a date " on release famous actor or artist poisonous article of Wu Yifan experience, netizen Wu Mou and company of Baidu net dispatch, byte beats the company is appealed to to come by Wu Yifan court. Court of first instance maintains Wu Mou behavior to form what to Wu Yifan reputation counterpoises to encroach, adjudicate its make an apology, recoup a loss. Wu Mou refuses to obey, appeal reachs Beijing one quadrangle. This courtyard made public open a court session to hear this case now.
On December 19, 2017, wu Mou is in Beijing of operation of limited company of science and technology of Baidu net message " date of a hunderd schools " reach Beijing byte of operation of limited company of jumpy science and technology " a date " the text is released on media oneself " Wu Yifan is responded to " by drug taking " very innocent, adept person assures with the head he has been been infected with absolutely " , have in the article " he did not touch drugs to throw my head come down " , " you say this position not drug taking pulls calf namely simply child " etc state content. Wu Yifan just thinks, once experience text chapter is released, reduced Wu Yifan's society badly to evaluate, wu Mou's behavior already formed pair of Wu Yifan to be encroached badly what reputation counterpoises, company of reason general Wu Mou and company of Baidu net dispatch, Baidu net dispatch appeals to to the court, the requirement deletes experience text section, close number of Wu Mou Zhang. Ask Wu Mou makes an apology at the same time, compensatory loss 350 thousand yuan. About the creation purpose of experience text chapter, wu Mou expresses is to be rumor of clean up of help Wu Yifan, its just cite according to the facts the netizen's comment, subjective did not encroach Wu Yifan honorary is intended, boycotting a rumor however instead, help Wu Yifan defend reputation.
After court of first instance is tried, think, in this case, wu Mou releases article caption and the content with terminal text to look, have misdirect public to form Wu Yifan to still be suspected of in fact apparently " drug taking " conclusion. And be suspected of " drug taking " negative opinion stars to recreation, undoubted meeting reduces its society evaluation and commercial value badly, exceed its to ought to exercise restraint as public character, patient limit. Reason Wu Mou releases experience text chapter to be put in apparent subjective ill will, form tort. Company of Baidu net dispatch and byte beat the company serves the person that offer as the network, in receive after complaining material, deleted experience case content in time, answer party application disclosed pertinent information in lawsuit, already fulfilled legal obligation, to maintain network space freedom, reasonable, lawful expression atmosphere, wu Yifan asks to be adopted to Wu Mou ban speech, shut the measure such as Zhang date to lack rationality, the court does not grant to support. Reason first instance adjudicates Wu Mou is in experience desk date home page issues statement 10 days continuously, make an apology to Wu Yifan; In the meantime, pay spirit to damage solatium and dimension authority to Wu Yifan reasonable expenses totals 30000 yuan.
After first instance adjudicates, wu Mou refuses to obey, appeal reachs Beijing one quadrangle. This morning, this courtyard made public open a court session to hear this case, appellant him Wu Mou appears in court should appeal to. 2 careful collegiate bench thinks, whether does this case controversy focus form what to Wu Yifan reputation counterpoises to encroach for experience text chapter. Appellant Wu Mou insists to think in careful of 2 careful front courtyard: Chapter of text of its compose experience does not have subjective ill will, the purpose is to help Wu Yifan settle a groundless allegation, defend its reputation, and the article reads influence quantity small, content just cites objectively netizen comment; In addition, the article did not cause undesirable effect to Wu Yifan, and him Wu Mou never also carries article benefit, because this did not encroach Wu Yifan,reputation counterpoises.
The article caption that appellee Wu Yifan just thinks Wu Mou is released and content gist all are infected with drugs for Wu Yifan, wu Mou gives Wu Yifan to bring undesirable society evaluation to be able to foreknow to this article as adult, its release a text; of subjective existence fault in addition, the content that Wu Mou releases a text is apparent inconsistent with the facts, wu Yifan regards social community as the character, had been performed to its by misdirect and connection of drug taking photograph art the career brings bad influence, wu Mou releases an article to have calumniatory sense to Wu Yifan, had formed what counterpoise to reputation to encroach.
End at present, this case still is among farther cognizance.
Zhang Yu of reporter of Beijing evening paper
The court offers a plan
