Tesla sues car big V 'Yan' for not apologizing, Beijing Internet Court rules
TapTechNews August 15th news, yesterday the Beijing Internet Court announced a notice that Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. applied for compulsory execution because the car big V Yan failed to fulfill the obligation to apologize.
TapTechNews learned from the notice that on April 25, 2021, the defendant used Weibo (nickname) Yan to forward the Weibo of the Weibo user (nickname) Corals in Fresh Water and posted the remarks Tesla finally has public relations investment ～ learned the gameplay of the Chinese Internet ten years ago, hiring水军. As of the preservation time of April 28, 2021, the number of forwards of this forwarded blog was 91, the number of comments was 562, and the number of likes was 2115. The Weibo account homepage is certified as Senior Car Expert, Car Practitioner, Top 10 Influential Car Big V in Weibo 2020, and the number of fans is 3.62 million.
The plaintiff (Tesla) claimed that the above remarks constituted slander to it and violated the right of reputation. The plaintiff denied that it had the behavior of hiring 水军. The defendant posted the remarks Tesla finally has public relations investment ～ learned the gameplay of the Chinese Internet ten years ago, hiring水军 in Weibo. Judging from the overall sentence, the public relations investment here refers to the hiring水军 behavior. Hiring水军 in the Internet space is a kind of malicious behavior that manipulates public opinion and violates good faith. According to the defendant, the defendant made this statement only based on his own speculation and the remarks of other users in the comment area questioning that Tesla Company hired 水军, without providing relevant evidence.
The court believes that although the plaintiff, as a well-known domestic enterprise, should have the obligation to tolerate social comments and public opinion supervision, the defendant's remarks are only based on subjective speculation and copying the remarks of others, and fails to fulfill the necessary obligation to verify information, which exceeds the objective limit when implementing public opinion supervision, and the factual basis is insufficient, and should bear the legal consequences of failure to prove. If the defendant's such behavior is connived, it will damage the social atmosphere of good faith. The Beijing Internet Court determined that the above remarks of the defendant constituted an infringement of the plaintiff's right of reputation.
The judgment is as follows:
The defendant Yan shall issue a written letter of apology to the plaintiff Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. within seven days as of the effective date of this judgment, and the content must be reviewed by the court; if the defendant Yan fails to fulfill the above content by the due date, the court will, upon the application of the plaintiff Tesla (Shanghai), publish the main content of this judgment in the newspapers distributed nationwide, and the cost of publication shall be borne by the defendant Yan;
Reject the other claims of the plaintiff Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
After the above judgment took effect, Yan did not fulfill the obligation to apologize, and Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. applied for compulsory execution {case number: (2024) Jing 0491 Zhi 2034}.
