Selling self-modified mobile phones has led to convictions, and the Supreme Court advises against casually purchasing and using eavesdropping and surveillance devices.
A person was found guilty of illegally producing and selling equipment specifically designed for eavesdropping and photography after modifying second-hand mobile phones. On December 11, the Supreme People’s Court released four typical cases that punish the illegal production, sale, and use of eavesdropping and photography devices. The Supreme Court stated that some criminals illegally produce and sell such devices, leading to their proliferation in society and contributing significantly to the issues of secret photography and eavesdropping.
According to The Paper, the typical cases involved both company-produced eavesdropping and photography equipment and devices modified by criminals using mobile phones. The purposes of the involved equipment included secretly photographing others’ private moments and cheating in gambling.
In one case of illegal production and sale of eavesdropping and photography equipment, the defendant, Chen, modified second-hand mobile phones and screen recording software into devices with eavesdropping and photography functions without obtaining the necessary approvals or permits from relevant authorities between September 4 and October 2, 2023. He sold a total of 41 modified devices for over 50,000 yuan, illegally profiting more than 30,000 yuan. An appraisal confirmed that the second-hand phones involved were classified as equipment specifically designed for eavesdropping and photography.
The People’s Court of Longtan District, Jilin City, Jilin Province, after hearing the case, determined that Chen’s actions constituted the crime of illegally producing and selling eavesdropping and photography equipment. After his arrest, Chen confessed to his crimes and voluntarily accepted punishment, which allowed for a lighter sentence under the law. He returned his illegal gains and provided a guarantee for property penalties, showing signs of remorse.
Based on the facts, nature, circumstances of Chen’s crime, and the degree of harm to society, he was sentenced to one year in prison for the crime of illegally producing and selling eavesdropping and photography equipment, along with a fine of 15,000 yuan. After the first-instance verdict, no appeal or protest was filed within the legal timeframe, and the judgment has taken legal effect.
“The equipment for eavesdropping and photography is strictly regulated by the state. Its illegal circulation in society not only risks infringing on citizens’ privacy and corporate trade secrets but also poses threats to public safety and national security,” the Supreme Court stated while explaining the significance of the case. The current laws regulate the illegal production, sale, and use of eavesdropping and photography equipment from various perspectives. The Civil Code stipulates that entering, photographing, or spying on others’ private spaces, such as homes or hotel rooms, without legal provisions or explicit consent from the rights holder constitutes an infringement of privacy rights. The Public Security Administration Punishment Law lists behaviors such as peeping, secret photography, eavesdropping, and disseminating others’ private information as violations of public security management, subject to penalties. The Criminal Law specifies criminal responsibilities for the illegal production, sale, and use of eavesdropping and photography equipment, clarifying the standards for conviction and sentencing.
“In this case, Chen modified and sold devices with eavesdropping and photography functions, producing and selling a large quantity and earning significant illegal profits, which severely disrupted social management order and violated Article 283 of the Criminal Law, constituting the crime of illegally producing and selling eavesdropping and photography equipment,” the Supreme Court stated. The People’s Court sentenced him based on the facts, nature, circumstances of his crime, and the degree of harm to society, effectively cracking down on the source of eavesdropping and photography equipment entering the market. This case also serves as a reminder to the public not to purchase or use eavesdropping and photography devices casually; any discovery of illegal production or sale of such equipment should be reported to the public security authorities promptly.
