真假有机产品之争：彩虹星球胜诉，“职业打假人”王海申请再审

Core Points - The legal dispute between Rainbow Planet Cultural Technology Co., Ltd. and the well-known "professional whistleblower" Wang Hai has lasted for 1,079 days, focusing on defamation claims regarding the company's organic products [1][3][5] - The second-instance ruling mandated Wang Hai to delete defamatory content and publicly apologize for three consecutive days, while also requiring him to compensate Rainbow Planet for economic losses totaling 97,800 yuan [1][3] - The case highlights ongoing discussions about the role and regulation of "professional whistleblowers" in the business environment, raising questions about the need for oversight and the potential for abuse in this profession [2][16] Company Overview - Rainbow Planet is positioned as a brand enterprise focused on organic agricultural industrialization and reverse-customized agricultural products based on consumer demand [1] - The company has faced scrutiny over its product claims, leading to a fine of 470,000 yuan from the Xi'an Market Supervision Administration for misleading advertising practices [7][8] Legal Proceedings - The dispute began on October 29, 2022, when Wang Hai publicly questioned the business model and product quality of Rainbow Planet, leading to multiple complaints and legal actions from both parties [3][4] - The final ruling on October 11, 2025, concluded that Wang Hai's actions constituted defamation against Rainbow Planet, despite his claims of acting in the public interest [5][10][12] Industry Implications - The case raises critical questions about the definition and regulation of "organic" products in China, as well as the responsibilities of whistleblowers in ensuring consumer protection without crossing into malicious practices [9][10][16] - The evolving nature of "professional whistleblowers" has led to concerns about the commodification of this role, with calls for clearer legal boundaries to prevent exploitation [14][16] Future Directions - Rainbow Planet plans to enhance transparency in its operations by implementing measures such as live-streaming production processes and educating consumers on compliance and product verification [12][16] - The industry consensus suggests a need for regulatory frameworks to define the boundaries of whistleblowing activities, ensuring they serve public interest without becoming a means for profit [16][17]