Exclusive Interview with Zhang Xiaosheng, Senior Partner at Dacheng (Shanghai) Law Firm: Online Violence Evidence Collection and Rights Protection Need Further “Cost Reduction and Efficiency Increase”
“Network violence information is characterized by its fast speed, wide range, numerous infringing subjects, and low违法成本. Under such a realistic dilemma, victims often face difficulties such as difficulty in obtaining evidence, high cost of rights protection, and long维权周期.” said Lawyer Zhang Xiaoxing.
In the current wave of digitalization, the internet has been deeply integrated into every aspect of life. However, the accompanying network violence has brought serious negative impacts on many people’s lives, posing a serious challenge to social harmony and stability.
How should network violence be precisely defined in terms of law? What are the actual effects of the prevention and control measures under the current legal framework? Faced with an increasingly complex and changing online environment, what directions should be taken to optimize and improve the treatment of network violence in the future?
On December 28th, at the 2024 Shanghai Anti-Network Violence Forum, The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) conducted an exclusive interview with Lawyer Zhang Xiaoxing, who is the Deputy Director of the Industry Self-Regulation and Coordination Committee of the Shanghai Internet Industry Federation and a senior partner at Beijing Da Cheng (Shanghai) Law Firm.
Rights protection against network violence: Difficulties in obtaining evidence and high costs are common pain points
The Paper: From a legal perspective, how is online violent behavior currently characterized in China’s legal system? What are the common forms of online violence such as verbal abuse, slander, and doxing, and which laws and regulations do they violate?
Zhang Xiaoxing: Network violent behavior is classified into three levels based on the severity of its circumstances: infringement, violation, and crime. It may be defined as an infringement, violation, or crime according to the circumstances.
Specifically, mild network violent behavior may violate laws and regulations on personality rights, reputation rights, privacy rights, and personal information protection in the Civil Code and Personal Information Protection Law. For network violent behavior that is more severe but does not constitute a criminal offense, such as publicly insulting others or fabricating facts to slander others through the internet, the public security organ can impose administrative penalties such as fines and detention based on the provisions on insulting and slandering others in the Law of Public Security Administration. For network violent behavior that is severe enough to constitute a crime, it can be held criminally responsible based on the provisions on crimes such as causing a disturbance, committing a crime of slanderous publicity, violating citizens’ personal information in the Criminal Law.
Taking the example of slandering and defaming others through the internet, whether it reaches the standard of being serious should be determined based on multiple aspects such as the content of insulting or defaming information, its dissemination scope, behavioral consequences, and subjective malice. For example, if a person slanders others through the internet and there are circumstances such as “the same slandering information being clicked or viewed by more than 5000 people or being forwarded by more than 500 people,” or “resulting in mental disorders, self-harming behavior or suicide of the victim or their family members,” it should be held criminally responsible.
The Paper: In your related cases, what specific and legally recognized harms have network violence caused to victims? What are the characteristics and difficulties of these harms in subsequent legal rights protection?
Zhang Xiaoxing: Based on the relevant cases I have handled and widely reported cases, network violence may cause reputation damage, mental damage, personal injury, property loss to victims.
The above damages may be considered to have a causal relationship with network violent behavior in law. In subsequent legal rights protection, victims face difficulties such as difficulty obtaining evidence, high cost of rights protection, and long维权周期 due to the fast speed, wide range of dissemination, numerous infringing subjects, and low违法成本of network violent information. Once negative public opinion becomes prevalent, it is difficult for individuals to contain the dissemination and expansion of bad information through their own strength. Therefore, timely intervention from platforms and regulatory authorities is crucial in network violence rights protection.
Punishing network violence: conventional legal means have lagging effects
The Paper: Under the current legal framework, what specific legal means are available to prevent and punish online violent behavior? How has the implementation of these legal means been in practice? What challenges have been encountered?
Zhang Xiaoxing: First, regarding prevention mechanisms for network violence. The “Prevention and Warning” mechanism is specified in Chapter Three of the “Regulations on the Governance of Network Violent Information,” which has been implemented since August 1st this year. However, legal means mainly focus on post-responsibility rather than pre-prevention. This chapter mainly aims to achieve monitoring of network violent behavior by clarifying the obligations of network information service providers. This includes refining classification standards for network violent information, identifying and detecting such information through combining technological means with manual review, timely identifying risks related to network violent information, and reporting to relevant departments.
Second, under
