Core Viewpoint - The first-instance judgment in the defamation case between the leading domestic sports apps "Zhibo8" and "Dongqiudi" has been made, with the court ruling that the content published by the defendants constitutes defamation [1][5]. Group 1: Case Background - The defamation case was filed on December 19, 2024, and is linked to a prior trademark dispute between the two companies [2]. - The operators of "Zhibo8" are Xiamen Aobo Network Technology Co., while "Dongqiudi" is operated by Beijing Duoge Technology Co., which is owned by Chen Cong [2]. - A financial dispute arose between Tianxing Capital Co. and Duoge Technology, leading to an arbitration ruling that required Duoge to return an investment of 31.06 million yuan and penalties [2]. Group 2: Court Proceedings - Duoge Technology filed an objection to the enforcement of a court ruling regarding the auction of 40 trademarks, claiming that the auction process was flawed [3]. - The Beijing High Court upheld the lower court's decision to cancel the auction of the trademarks due to the existence of similar trademarks owned by Duoge [3]. Group 3: Defamation Claims - The court found that multiple articles published by Duoge, including accusations against Aobo and Tianxing of collusion, contained defamatory content against Aobo [5]. - Aobo claimed damages totaling 10 million yuan from Duoge and the other defendants for the defamation [6]. Group 4: Responses from Companies - Following the judgment, Chen Cong, CEO of "Dongqiudi," announced plans to appeal the decision and indicated that the company is in good operational condition [7]. - Lin Yufeng, CEO of "Zhibo8," stated that the company would continue to comply with the court's ruling while focusing on its business development [8].

Core Viewpoint - The first-instance judgment in the defamation case between the leading domestic sports apps "Zhibo8" and "Dongqiudi" has been made, with the court ruling that the content published by the defendants constitutes defamation [1][7]. Group 1: Case Background - The defamation case was filed on December 19, 2024, and is linked to a prior trademark dispute between the two companies [2]. - "Zhibo8" is operated by Xiamen Aobo Network Technology Co., while "Dongqiudi" is operated by Beijing Duoge Technology Co., with Chen Cong as its legal representative [2]. - A financial dispute arose between Tianxing Capital Co. and Duoge Technology, leading to an arbitration ruling that required Duoge to return an investment of 31.06 million yuan and penalties [2]. Group 2: Trademark Auction and Legal Proceedings - During the enforcement of the arbitration ruling, the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court seized 163 trademarks held by Duoge and auctioned 40 of them, which were won by Aobo for approximately 20.92 million yuan [3]. - Duoge contested the auction, claiming that similar trademarks were not evaluated and auctioned together, which led to the court supporting Duoge's request to annul the auction [3]. - The Beijing High Court upheld the original ruling of the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court regarding the auction [3]. Group 3: Defamation Claims and Court Ruling - Chen Cong, through the "Dongqiudi" account, accused Aobo and Tianxing of colluding to auction trademarks, alleging that the auction was a scheme to acquire Duoge's core assets at a low price [5][6]. - The court found that several articles published by Duoge contained defamatory content against Aobo, leading to a ruling that required the defendants to delete the articles, publicly apologize, and compensate Aobo a total of 121,748 yuan [7]. Group 4: Responses from Companies - Following the judgment, Chen Cong announced an appeal against the ruling, stating that the company is in good operational condition and is preparing for future litigation against Aobo for trademark infringement and unfair competition [8]. - Lin Yufeng, CEO of "Zhibo8," indicated that the company would continue to respond legally to the defamation case and focus on its business development [9].

Core Viewpoint - The recent court ruling in favor of "Live Bar" against "Dongqiudi" highlights the ongoing legal disputes in the sports app industry, emphasizing the importance of reputation management and the potential financial implications of defamation claims [1][5]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The Xiamen Siming District People's Court ruled that certain content published by four defendants, including Chen Cong and Beijing Duoge Technology Co., constituted defamation, ordering them to delete related articles, publicly apologize, and jointly compensate Xiamen Aobo Network Technology Co., totaling 121,748 yuan [1][5]. - The legal battle stemmed from a previous investment dispute between Beijing Tianxing Capital and Beijing Duoge Technology, which led to the forced auction of the "Dongqiudi" trademark, ultimately acquired by Aobo for 20.9184 million yuan [3][4]. Group 2: Background and Context - The conflict traces back to 2016 when an investment agreement led to disputes over repayment, culminating in a 2022 arbitration ruling requiring Duoge to return 31.06 million yuan, which was not fulfilled, prompting further legal actions [3][4]. - In October 2024, Chen Cong publicly accused Aobo of colluding with Tianxing to undermine "Dongqiudi," which sparked significant user discussions and negative comments affecting "Live Bar's" brand reputation [4][5]. Group 3: Court's Findings - The court found that the terms "collusion" and "setup" were presented as established facts without sufficient evidence, constituting defamation [5]. - The defendants are required to delete five specific articles within three days and issue a public apology within seven days, with the apology content subject to court approval and to remain visible for at least 30 days [5].

Group 1 - Lan Shili, the former richest man in Hubei, issued an apology to Yihai Kerry for making false statements about Jinlongyu, acknowledging that his comments constituted defamation [1] - The court found that Lan's statements, including claims that "Jinlongyu lost 650 billion in two days" and "should be delisted," were untrue, leading to a civil judgment against him [1][3] - Lan was ordered to pay Yihai Kerry 10,000 yuan in damages and legal fees, and to publish a statement of apology on relevant online platforms [3] Group 2 - Yihai Kerry Food Marketing Co., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Yihai Kerry Jinlongyu Food Group, was established in 2009 with a registered capital of 68 million yuan [3] - The company emphasized strict regulations on the transportation of bulk edible oil following media reports of improper practices, asserting that all transport vehicles undergo rigorous checks [5] - Lan Shili, who founded Dongxing Airlines and was once listed as the richest man in Hubei, has faced significant business setbacks, including the bankruptcy of his airline and multiple company dissolutions [5]

Core Viewpoint - The well-known "fake goods fighter" Wang Hai has been sued by the organic fresh food brand Rainbow Planet for defamation, and the case has reached a final judgment where Rainbow Planet won, requiring Wang to compensate 97,800 yuan for damages to its reputation [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - On October 17, the Xi'an Intermediate People's Court ruled in favor of Rainbow Planet, stating that Wang Hai's public comments about the brand's products lacked factual basis and distorted the truth, damaging the company's reputation [2][3]. - The court ordered Wang Hai to delete all defamatory content from his social media accounts and to publicly apologize for three consecutive days [2][3]. Group 2: Company Background and Issues - Rainbow Planet, established in 2015, positions itself as a brand focused on food safety and organic fresh products, but has faced multiple controversies regarding its promotional practices [4]. - In December 2023, Rainbow Planet was fined 470,000 yuan for violating the Anti-Unfair Competition Law due to misleading product information and promotional practices [4][5]. Group 3: Ongoing Controversies - Wang Hai has continued to express doubts about Rainbow Planet's products, claiming that 49 of its products have been found to have false advertising, including allegations of "fake organic" claims [3][5]. - Following a series of complaints, the Xi'an Market Supervision Bureau initiated an investigation into Rainbow Planet's sales practices, particularly regarding its Salted Shrimp product [5].

Core Points - The court ruled that two 17-year-old boys, Tang and Wu, along with their parents, must publicly apologize to Haidilao and compensate for damages totaling 2.2 million yuan [1][4] - The incident involved the boys urinating in a hot pot at Haidilao, which was deemed a serious violation of public decency and caused reputational harm to the company [2][3] Legal Proceedings - The Shanghai Huangpu District Court found that the actions of Tang and Wu constituted both property and reputation infringement against Haidilao [2][3] - Despite being minors, the court determined that the boys were aware of the legal implications of their actions and thus held them accountable for their behavior [3][4] Financial Implications - The total compensation of 2.2 million yuan includes 130,000 yuan for the loss of utensils and cleaning costs, and 2 million yuan for operational and reputational losses [4]

Core Points - The court ruled in favor of Li Yang in a defamation case against his ex-wife, ordering her to apologize publicly and pay compensation for emotional damages [1][4][6] Group 1: Case Background - Li Yang's ex-wife accused him of domestic violence against their daughter in a series of social media posts, which led to significant public attention [1][4] - The court found that Li Yang's ex-wife failed to provide sufficient evidence to support her claims of abuse, leading to the ruling in favor of Li Yang [3][4] Group 2: Court Proceedings - The trial included the submission of 40 pieces of evidence by Li Yang's legal team, while the ex-wife's legal team presented 11 pieces to argue the platform's non-responsibility [2] - The court noted that the ex-wife's claims were not substantiated by the evidence presented, including audio and photographic evidence [3][4] Group 3: Ruling Details - The court ordered Li Yang's ex-wife to issue a public apology within 72 hours and pay 20,000 yuan in damages [1][4] - The ruling emphasized that while Li Yang's parenting methods were criticized, the ex-wife's statements constituted defamation and harmed his reputation [3][4] Group 4: Future Implications - Li Yang expressed satisfaction with the ruling and plans to donate the compensation amount, indicating a desire to clear his name [6] - The case highlights the legal boundaries between public scrutiny and defamation, particularly concerning allegations of domestic violence [7]

Group 1 - Zhang Xiaoling, a female lawyer, revealed that she was diagnosed with late-stage cancer after 10 years of health check-ups, which has attracted significant attention [1][4] - Aikang Guobin, the health check-up institution, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Zhang Xiaoling, seeking 10 million yuan in damages [1][4] - The Shanghai Pudong New District People's Court initially scheduled a hearing for September 11, 2025, but this was canceled due to Zhang's jurisdictional objection [1][4] Group 2 - Aikang Guobin claims that Zhang Xiaoling misrepresented her diagnosis timeline, stating she was diagnosed with early-stage kidney cancer a year after her check-up, while she alleged she was diagnosed with late-stage cancer in 2024 [4] - Aikang Group held a media briefing on July 30, confirming that there were no missed or misdiagnosed cases regarding Zhang's health check-up, emphasizing that a basic health check cannot guarantee the detection of all diseases [4][5] - Zhang Xiaoling has filed a request to transfer the case to the Beijing Internet Court, expressing her desire to prevent Aikang Guobin from withdrawing the lawsuit midway [4]

Core Points - A dispute arose over a 20 yuan unpaid bill at a fried chicken shop, with one party accusing the buyer of maliciously skipping payment, while the buyer claimed it was an unintentional oversight and sought an apology after making the payment [1][2] - The case was successfully mediated by the People's Court of Xinzheng City, where both parties reached an agreement after the judge's intervention [3] Summary by Sections Incident Overview - On May 29, 2024, a customer named Fan purchased food worth 20 yuan but failed to make the payment, leading the shop owner Yan to believe it was a deliberate act of skipping payment [1] - Yan shared surveillance footage in WeChat groups, which led to Fan feeling her privacy was violated and her reputation damaged [2] Legal Proceedings - Fan filed a lawsuit against Yan, seeking a public apology, cessation of the infringement, and compensation for emotional distress amounting to 10,000 yuan, along with legal fees [2] - During the court proceedings, both parties maintained their positions, with Fan asserting her forgetfulness and Yan insisting on the intentional nature of the act [2] Resolution - The judge facilitated a "back-to-back" mediation, resulting in Yan issuing a written apology to Fan, who then dropped her other legal claims, concluding the dispute amicably [3] Legal Insights - The judge highlighted the importance of distinguishing between unintentional mistakes and intentional acts of skipping payment, emphasizing the need for merchants to communicate politely with customers before escalating issues [4] - Merchants are advised to collect evidence and consider legal action only if necessary, while avoiding extreme measures that could lead to legal repercussions [4]