Recently, the first instance of the Beijing Internet court ruled that the mobile phone number involved in the case was improperly disclosed by the Internet drama involved, causing Huangs private life peace to be invaded, which is beyond the limit of reasonable tolerance. The producer has subjective fault and constitutes an infringement of Huangs privacy right.
It turned out to be the Internet drama
Huang complained that since November 5, 2019, he has continuously received harassment phone calls and wechat friend verification notices, seriously disrupting normal life and work status. After inquiry, we learned that the second producer of the online drama did not process the mobile phone number that appeared in the online drama involved in the case, leading to the mobile phone number verified by Huangs real name appeared in the eighth episode of the online drama involved in the case.
Huang believes that the second producer of the online drama leaked the mobile phone number of its real name authentication, and filed a lawsuit with the court on the ground of infringing its privacy right, requesting that the second producer of the online drama should pay 50000 yuan of mental damage compensation to himself, 1000 yuan of lawyers fee and 1000 yuan of lost work fee due to rights maintenance.
The screen has been processed in time
Company a argued that the mobile phone number involved in the case was purchased by the crews authorized staff during the shooting period and was legally used by the crew. It has no infringement fact, no infringement intention and no subjective fault.
On November 8, 2019, after discovering the mobile phone number in the eighth episode of the play, company a immediately blurred the relevant pictures, and transmitted the processed video data to the video platform on November 10, 2019, and completed the replacement on the same day, without subjective fault. Moreover, the evidence submitted by Huang can not prove that the mobile phone number in the online drama is related to the infringement of his privacy, nor can he prove that the act disturbs his normal life and causes serious mental damage.
Company B argued that it was not the producer of the online drama involved in the case, only the producer of the play, and did not participate in the production process, and had no obligation to review and supervise the video content.
Courts determination of first instance
Online drama infringes privacy
A few days ago, the Beijing Internet court found that the act of disclosing Huangs mobile phone number constitutes an infringement of Huangs privacy right. Company a and company B were ordered to compensate Mr. Huang with 3000 yuan of solace and 1000 yuan of lawyers fee within 10 days after the judgment came into effect.
The court held that according to the relevant provisions of the general provisions of the civil law, the right of privacy enjoyed by natural persons includes the tranquility of private life of natural persons. In this case, the producer of the online drama involved in the case used the mobile phone number involved in the play and made it public on the network without the knowledge of Huang, which may lead to the majority of netizens harassing Huang through telephone, social application software and other means, putting Huang in the danger of being invaded.
In fact, Huang received several strange calls and wechat friend applications after the number was released. After the producer processed the broadcast screen of the authorized website, Huang still received wechat interference from strangers, which obviously destroyed Huangs peaceful state.
In addition, the court found that the evidence in the case could not prove that company a entrusted the crew to purchase the mobile phone number involved in the shooting of the online drama. Even though the mobile phone number belonged to the crew at that time, it can be seen from Huangs current possession of the mobile phone number involved in the case that the period of legal use claimed by company a was obviously shorter than the normal period of making and broadcasting the film involved in the case.
The court did not pay attention to the use of mobile phone numbers, and the parties involved in the case considered that the use of mobile phone numbers had no obligation
Gong Ping, a judge of Beijing Internet court, pointed out that with the progress of social civilization, the right to privacy, as a basic civil right, is showing a trend of strengthening protection in both legislative guidance and legal implementation.
In this context, it is necessary for the film and television production industry to strengthen the legal awareness of the protection of civil rights, further improve the duty of care, follow the principle of safety and necessity, and avoid the invasion of their private life because of improper behavior.
Reporter Zhao Jiaqi
Source: Zhang Zutao, editor in charge of Beijing Youth Daily_ NT5054