What should actors from "Criminal Investigation Unit 6" do when facing online violence? Lawyer explains the legal path for defending reputation rights against infringement.
Event Review: How Did Controversy Over Roles Escalate into Personal Attacks?
The origin of this controversy was the dissatisfaction of viewers with the portrayal of a female character in "The VI Group of Major Cases" (重案六组). Some netizens projected their feelings about the character onto the actress herself, posting numerous comments on social media that were insulting and degrading, such as "bad acting," "terrible character," and "get out of the entertainment industry." Some even sent threatening messages via private direct messages. As the topic climbed the trending list, more netizens who were unaware of the full story joined in the condemnation, resulting in large-scale online harassment.
From a legal perspective, the public enjoys freedom of criticism regarding literary and artistic works and their creators, but the boundary of criticism lies in staying on topic and not crossing legal limits. When speech shifts from discussions of acting and plot to insulting attacks on an actor's personal character or appearance, its nature fundamentally changes—this may constitute infringement of the actor's right to reputation and personal dignity. Article 1024 of China's Civil Code clearly stipulates that civil subjects enjoy the right to reputation, and no organization or individual may infringe upon others' right to reputation through insults, defamation, or other means. As public figures, actors' right to reputation is subject to certain restrictions, but this does not mean they may be subjected to attacks without any bottom line.
It is worth noting that online violence often presents the illusion that "the law cannot punish the many." Many participants believe that posting anonymously comes with no responsibility, yet they overlook the fact that, under the real-name registration system for the internet, every offensive remark can be traced. In 2023, the judicial interpretation on online violence issued by the Supreme People's Court further refined the legal liability for acts of online violence, providing victims with a clearer legal basis for defending their rights.
Legal Analysis: The Elements and Liable Parties of Reputation Right Infringement
According to the Civil Code and relevant judicial interpretations, four elements must be satisfied to establish defamation of reputation: the existence of damage facts, the wrongful nature of the conduct, a causal relationship between the wrongful conduct and the resulting damage, and subjective fault on the part of the actor. Specifically in the context of online harassment, the publisher of the infringing statement, the forwarder, and the online platform may all become liable parties.
First, the publisher of the speech is the most directly liable infringer. If the speech contains fabricated facts or malicious disparagement that clearly exceeds the scope of reasonable criticism, it may constitute defamation or insult. For example, content asserting that an actor "rose to prominence through unspoken rules" without any basis is typically defamation, while using insulting terms such as "ugly freak" or "disgusting" constitutes insult. Victims may demand that the infringer cease the infringement, issue an apology, eliminate the adverse impact, and pay compensation for emotional distress damages.
Second, online platforms bear the obligation of "notice—deletion." Pursuant to Article 1195 of the Civil Code, rights holders have the right to notify network service providers to take necessary measures such as deletion, blocking, and disconnecting links. If a platform fails to handle such matters in a timely manner, it shall bear joint and several liability for the expanded portion of the damage. The "Provisions on the Governance of Cyberbullying Information," effective in 2024, further strengthens platforms' obligations for proactive monitoring and handling, requiring them to take measures such as early warning and interception of cyberbullying information.
Moreover, the responsibility of forwarders is often overlooked. Malicious forwarding or mob-style amplification may also constitute infringement. In judicial practice, there have been multiple cases where forwarders were ordered to bear compensatory liability. For example, in a case where a celebrity sued an internet user, the court held that if a statement is forwarded more than 500 times and its content is false, the forwarder shall bear joint and several liability with the original publisher.
Pathways for Rights Protection: Practical Key Points from Evidence Preservation to Litigation
When experiencing cyberbullying, many people's first reaction is to respond angrily, but this often backfires. Lawyers advise that rational rights protection should follow these steps:
First, preserve the evidence. Use notarization or blockchain evidence preservation tools to secure the web links, screenshots, and screen recordings of the infringing statements, and record the publication time, publisher account information, and other details. Electronic evidence is easily deleted, and timely preservation is key to successful rights enforcement. If conditions permit, you may commission a lawyer to issue a legal letter requesting the platform to remove the content and provide the infringer's real-name information.
Step two: File a complaint with the platform. Submit an infringement complaint in accordance with the platform's rules, attaching proof of identity and proof of rights. Major social media platforms all have reporting portals, and content involving personal attacks is typically addressed within 24 hours. If the platform refuses to take action, you may report the matter to the cyberspace administration authorities, or name the platform as a co-defendant.
Third, file a lawsuit. If the infringement is serious, a lawsuit for infringement of the right of reputation may be filed with the People's Court. The claims may include: ordering the defendant to cease the infringement, publicly apologize (for a duration of no less than 7 days), and compensate for economic losses and damages for mental distress. According to Article 1183 of the Civil Code, compensation for mental distress must reach a "serious" level, and the court will make a comprehensive determination based on the severity of the remarks, the scope of dissemination, and the impact on the victim.
Step four: criminal accountability. For particularly egregious circumstances, such as fabricating facts to defame others, where the same defamatory information has actually been clicked or viewed 5,000 times or more, or has been forwarded 500 times or more, it may constitute the crime of defamation and a private criminal prosecution may be initiated. The 2023 Guiding Opinions of the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security clearly stipulate that cyber violence crimes should be strictly punished in accordance with the law.
Lawyer's Advice: Strategies for Protecting the Right of Reputation for Public Figures and Ordinary Individuals
This incident serves as a wake-up call for everyone living in the internet age. For public figures, the right to reputation is a vital component of their professional life, but rights protection requires a strategic approach. On one hand, malicious attacks must be resolutely countered to avoid an online environment where "bad money drives out good"; on the other hand, tolerance should be shown toward criticism based on facts, as overreaction may trigger backlash. It is recommended that public figures hire professional legal teams and establish public opinion monitoring mechanisms to respond quickly and handle infringement information by severity levels once detected.
For ordinary people, cyber violence can also happen to themselves. For example, being maliciously defamed on social media, being insulted in comment sections, or having personal information leaked—all of these can be addressed by referring to the rights protection approaches mentioned above. Special reminder: do not fight violence with violence, to avoid creating new infringement through retaliatory remarks. At the same time, pay attention to protecting personal privacy and avoid easily disclosing sensitive information such as home addresses or workplaces online.
Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has深耕 the fields of online infringement and reputation rights protection for many years, having represented numerous influential cyberbullying rights-protection cases and accumulated extensive litigation experience. We provide a full-chain legal service ranging from evidence preservation and lawyer's letter warnings to litigation representation, assisting victims in safeguarding their rights in accordance with the law. If you or your friends or relatives are experiencing cyber violence, you are welcome to consult us. We will protect your reputation and dignity with professional strength.
Cyberspace is not a lawless realm. Every like, share, and comment may carry legal consequences. Only by speaking rationally and protecting rights in accordance with the law can we keep the online environment clear, sound, and orderly.
