Group 1 - Jiangsu Province High People's Court released typical cases to support the high-quality development of the private economy, aiming to guide market regulation and stimulate business vitality [1] - The cases cover various sectors including finance, healthcare, cultural creativity, engineering, social media, small and medium-sized enterprise accounts, and corporate restructuring, reflecting the court's commitment to equal protection of the private economy and market order [1] Group 2 - A property company successfully challenged a bank's service fee of 15 million yuan, which was deemed a disguised interest charge, thereby reducing the financial burden on enterprises [2] - The court's ruling aligns with the policy to optimize the business environment and the legislative spirit of promoting the private economy [2] Group 3 - A court ruled against the implicit discrimination of private hospitals in insurance claims, allowing a family to receive compensation despite treatment at a private facility, emphasizing the quality of private healthcare institutions [3] - The ruling invalidated restrictive clauses that limited hospital choices to public institutions, thus protecting patient rights [3] Group 4 - A technology company was awarded 30 million yuan in damages for copyright infringement against a short video platform that exploited its popular drama "The Wind Blows Penelia" [4] - The court's decision reinforced intellectual property protection for private cultural enterprises and boosted their confidence in defending their rights [4] Group 5 - A self-media operator was ordered to pay 500,000 yuan in damages for publishing false claims about a construction company, which harmed its reputation and led to significant economic losses [5] - The court's ruling established reasonable boundaries for self-media oversight, preventing unfounded defamation of businesses [5]

Core Viewpoint - The rise of short video platforms has led to an increase in individuals using these platforms for rights protection, but there is a fine line between legitimate claims and defamation, as illustrated by a recent court case involving a defamation dispute stemming from a short video posted on Douyin [1][2]. Case Summary - In May 2024, an individual named Zhang was entrusted by Li to handle certain matters for a fee of 30,000 yuan, but after Li terminated the contract, Zhang only refunded 20,000 yuan. Li then posted a video on Douyin accusing Zhang of being a fraud, which garnered significant attention with nearly 400 shares, over 700 comments, and more than 2,000 likes [2]. - Zhang claimed that Li's video severely damaged his reputation and filed a lawsuit for defamation, seeking compensation for the harm caused [2]. Court Ruling - The court determined that Li's video constituted a negative evaluation of Zhang, and Li failed to provide evidence to support the truthfulness of his claims. The court found that Li's actions resulted in a significant reduction in Zhang's social standing, establishing a clear causal link between Li's defamatory statements and the damage to Zhang's reputation [3]. - Although Li deleted the video before the court hearing, the court ruled that he must publicly apologize to Zhang on Douyin, aligning the scope of the apology with the extent of the infringement [3]. Legal Implications - The case highlights the legal boundaries of free speech in the context of online platforms, emphasizing that while individuals have the right to express their opinions, they must not infringe upon the legitimate rights of others, particularly regarding defamation [4]. - The court's decision reinforces the notion that online statements must be truthful and lawful, as failure to adhere to these standards can lead to legal repercussions, including the obligation to cease infringement and restore the injured party's reputation [4][5]. Recommendations for Individuals - Individuals facing online defamation should preserve evidence such as screenshots, links, and comments to support their claims [7]. - They should utilize reporting mechanisms on social media platforms to request the removal of infringing content and seek assistance in identifying the infringer [7]. - In cases of serious defamation, individuals are advised to report to law enforcement and consider filing civil lawsuits to seek damages and public apologies [8][9].

Group 1 - The Supreme People's Court continues to implement typical cases of the Civil Code, focusing on protecting intellectual property rights and supporting the development of new productive forces, which aims to enhance the quality of economic and social development [1] - The case involving the unauthorized use of a person's voice highlights the legal recognition of voice as a personal right, establishing boundaries for new business models and technologies [2] - A case regarding malicious defamation by a customer against a business demonstrates the legal recourse available for businesses to protect their reputation and seek damages for harm caused by false statements [3] Group 2 - Additional typical cases include those related to the infringement of trade secrets in the electric vehicle chassis technology and civil public interest litigation concerning ecological damage, indicating a broader application of the Civil Code in various sectors [4]