Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the negative impact of social media influencers, particularly focusing on the case of Hu Chenfeng, who has been banned for inciting social division and promoting extreme views for the sake of gaining attention and followers [3][5]. Group 1: Influencer Behavior - Hu Chenfeng, a popular influencer with millions of followers, created a divisive narrative by categorizing users as "Apple people" or "Android people," which he used to generate social conflict and attract traffic [5][8]. - His portrayal of "Apple people" as the elite and "Android people" as the lower class has sparked significant social controversy and highlighted the dangers of such divisive rhetoric [7][8]. Group 2: Expert Opinions - Experts argue that Hu's actions are a deliberate attempt to create sharp divisions and provoke emotional responses among different groups, ultimately aiming for commercial gain [8]. - There is a call for a more structured management mechanism to regulate harmful content on social media, ensuring a more inclusive and orderly online environment [10]. Group 3: Recommendations for Improvement - Suggestions include enhancing platform algorithms and review mechanisms, encouraging mainstream media to play a more active role in guiding public opinion, and fostering a healthier online atmosphere [12].

中央网信办近期开展为期2个月的"清朗·整治恶意挑动负面情绪问题"专项行动，加强排查处置，堵塞问 题漏洞，旨在营造良好网络生态，在网络上引起积极反响。 一个真正清朗、健康的网络空间，既要依法剔除有害信息，守住法律底线；更需要网络平台、内容生产 者、网民等多方主体协同发力，主动拥抱健康向上的价值导向与网络文化。为此，要优化推荐机制，强 化内容审核，对不良倾向及时纠偏，积极推广具有建设性的内容，塑造以正能量为导向的网络氛围。唯 有多方协同、综合施策，将正能量导向融入网络治理各环节，才能让网络空间真正成为促进社会和谐、 推动文明进步的重要平台。 （文章来源：经济日报） 长期以来，网络上恶意挑动负面情绪的内容屡禁不止，令广大网民不堪其扰。这类恶意信息与负面情绪 不仅存在于短视频、直播、短剧等显性内容载体中，更藏身于弹幕、评论区、表情包等日常互动环节， 渗透在网络社交的细微之处。部分平台依托算法推荐，用负面情绪营造信息茧房以锁定用户，使用户陷 入越愤怒越沉迷、越沉迷越推送的机制中。在这一过程中，情绪不再服务于个人表达，而成为锁定用 户、放大流量的工具。 相较于事实和逻辑，情绪天然具有更强的传染性。在流量驱动下，一些内容生 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses significant changes in the jurisdiction of internet courts in China, effective from November 1, focusing on complex cases while removing simpler, repetitive cases from their purview [3][5]. Summary by Sections Changes in Jurisdiction - The Supreme Court has issued new regulations that expand the jurisdiction of internet courts in Beijing, Hangzhou, and Guangzhou to include four new types of cases: "network data," "personal information protection and privacy," "virtual property," and "unfair competition disputes" [3][5]. - Simultaneously, it removes simpler cases such as "financial loans," "small loan contract disputes," and certain "copyright disputes" from its jurisdiction, addressing the issue of overwhelming simple cases that consume judicial resources [3][5][6]. Historical Context and Issues - Initially, internet courts were established to explore online litigation rules, but the effectiveness of this mission has diminished as many courts can now conduct online hearings [6][10]. - The Beijing Internet Court reported handling 194,000 cases from its establishment in 2018 to July 2023, with a high concentration of simple cases, leading to a "case overload" issue [6][10]. Strategic Repositioning - Experts suggest that the recent adjustments are not merely minor tweaks but a strategic reconfiguration of the internet courts' functions, aiming to focus on complex and emerging digital economy-related disputes [6][9]. - The article emphasizes the need for dynamic adjustments in jurisdiction based on the maturity of case types and the necessity for rule exploration in new areas [7][9]. Future Directions - The internet courts are expected to evolve into "rule incubators" for governance in the digital space, addressing issues like data rights, platform economy, and algorithm governance [14][15]. - There is a call for establishing judicial review standards for platform rules, ensuring fairness and transparency in algorithmic decision-making [15][16]. - The article highlights the importance of maintaining judicial integrity while innovating procedural rules, ensuring that the rights of parties involved are not diminished [16].

日前，最高法发布《关于互联网法院案件管辖的规定》，对我国北京、杭州、广州三家互联网法院的管 辖范围做出"加减法"，新增管辖四类案件，即"网络数据""网络个人信息保护和隐私""网络虚拟财 产"和"网络不正当竞争纠纷"，同时将"金融借款、小额借款合同纠纷"、部分简单的"网络著作权纠 纷"以及"产品责任纠纷"等移出管辖范围，直面近几年互联网法院面临的受理大量简单重复案件、审判 资源错配等饱受诟病的问题。 诞生于互联网司法发展起步阶段的互联网法院，曾聚焦探索在线诉讼规则，奉行"网上案件网上审"，几 年时间后，这一工作使命似乎已走到尽头。如何处理潜伏已久的危机——缺乏专门法院定位和全员发展 在线审理带来的冲击，成为互联网法院急需面对的课题。 如何证明自己存在的价值，以及如何发挥自己的优势，成为互联网法院面临的棘手难题。 今年11月1日起，互联网法院的案件管辖范围将发生重大变化，未来将更聚焦前沿复杂性案件，剥离简 单类型化案件。 "这不是一次简单的微调。"西政智能司法研究院法律大数据挖掘与应用研究中心主任黄磊告诉第一财经 记者，而是一次具有战略前瞻性的对互联网法院的"功能重塑"。 管辖范围做加减法 此次新规最为重要的是， ...

Core Points - The Supreme People's Court has issued new regulations to enhance the jurisdiction of internet courts, effective from November 1, 2025, aimed at improving judicial convenience and supporting the healthy development of the digital economy [1][3]. Summary by Sections New Jurisdictional Additions - Four new types of internet-related cases have been added to the jurisdiction of internet courts, including disputes over "network data ownership, infringement, and contract," "protection of personal information and privacy rights," "virtual property ownership, infringement, and contract," and "unfair competition in the network" [4]. Adjustments to Existing Jurisdiction - Certain cases have been removed from the jurisdiction of internet courts, such as disputes related to "financial loan contracts completed online," "copyright ownership disputes for works published online," and "product liability disputes arising from e-commerce purchases," which will now be handled by local grassroots courts [5]. Retained Jurisdictional Cases - Four types of cases will continue to be under the jurisdiction of internet courts, including "domain name ownership, infringement, and contract disputes," "disputes arising from online shopping contracts," "network service contract disputes," and "public interest litigation cases initiated by procuratorial organs" [6]. Adjustments in Administrative and International Cases - The jurisdiction of internet courts over administrative cases and cases involving foreign, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan matters has been adjusted, allowing for better oversight of network regulation and promoting unified enforcement standards [7].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has announced new regulations to enhance the jurisdiction of internet courts, effective from November 1, 2025, aiming to improve judicial efficiency and support the healthy development of the digital economy [1]. Summary by Sections New Jurisdictional Additions - Four new categories of internet-related cases have been added to the jurisdiction of internet courts, including disputes over "network data ownership, infringement, and contract," "personal information protection and privacy disputes," "virtual property ownership, infringement, and contract disputes," and "unfair competition disputes" [2]. Removal of Certain Cases - Certain cases have been removed from the jurisdiction of internet courts, such as financial loan disputes completed online, copyright disputes related to online publications, product liability disputes from e-commerce purchases, and traditional network infringement cases [3]. Retained Jurisdiction - Four categories of cases will continue to be handled by internet courts, including disputes over "domain name ownership, infringement, and contracts," "e-commerce contract disputes," "network service contract disputes," and "public interest litigation cases initiated by procuratorial organs" [4]. Adjustments to Administrative and International Cases - The jurisdiction of internet courts has been adjusted to include administrative cases related to network data regulation and personal information protection, as well as international cases involving network data disputes and virtual property disputes, enhancing the court's role in global network governance [5].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has issued new regulations to enhance the jurisdiction of internet courts, effective from November 1, 2025, to better serve the digital economy and improve online dispute resolution [1][2]. Group 1: Background and Reasons for Regulation Adjustment - The adjustment of jurisdiction is a response to the need for improved governance in the digital economy and aligns with the directives from the 20th Central Committee's Third Plenary Session [3]. - The changes are necessary to fulfill the functional positioning of internet courts as outlined by the Central Committee, focusing on online dispute resolution and legal governance in the digital space [4]. - The adjustment addresses the diverse judicial needs of the public in the digital age, as new types of legal disputes related to data, algorithms, and personal information protection are emerging [5][6]. Group 2: Impact on Litigation - The new regulations will change the jurisdiction of specific cases, such as data rights and online personal information disputes, which will now be handled by internet courts [7]. - The adjustment aims to enhance the litigation experience for parties involved, ensuring that they can still benefit from online dispute resolution mechanisms [8]. Group 3: Judicial Capacity and Resources - Internet courts have accumulated substantial experience and resources to handle new types of network-related cases, having previously dealt with significant cases in this domain [9]. - The courts have established a specialized team of judges with expertise in both law and technology, ensuring effective handling of complex digital disputes [9]. Group 4: Broader Implications for Internet Courts - The jurisdictional changes will enhance the overall level of internet adjudication across the country, serving as a model for other courts [10]. - The adjustments will help establish clearer judicial standards for emerging fields, thereby strengthening the legal framework for digital economy governance [11]. - The regulations will also expand the jurisdiction to include international network cases, promoting better engagement in global internet governance [12].

第一，新增四类网络案件由互联网法院集中管辖。在《2018年规定》基础上，《规定》将"网络数据权 属、侵权、合同纠纷""网络个人信息保护、隐私权纠纷""网络虚拟财产权属、侵权、合同纠纷""网络不 正当竞争纠纷"纳入互联网法院管辖范围。《规定》施行后，北京市、杭州市、广州市市辖区内应由基 层法院审理的上述案件将分别由三家互联网法院集中管辖，有效探索前述新型、前沿、重点网络领域裁 判规则，发挥规范引领、促进保障作用，及时回应网络空间治理新要求，护航数字经济健康发展。 为加强互联网法院建设，进一步发挥互联网法院司法便民利民、公正高效便捷解纷、强化网络空间依法 治理、服务保障数字经济健康发展的功能作用，最高人民法院今日发布《最高人民法院关于互联网法院 案件管辖的规定》，对互联网法院案件管辖范围作出调整完善。《规定》自2025年11月1日起施行。 2018年9月，最高人民法院制定印发《最高人民法院关于互联网法院审理案件若干问题的规定》（以下 简称《2018年规定》），明确了互联网法院集中管辖所在市的辖区内应当由基层人民法院受理的网络购 物、网络服务、网络金融借款、网络小额借款、网络著作权、网络域名、网络侵权、网购产品责任 ...

Core Viewpoint - Kuaishou Technology has acknowledged the issues raised by the Cyberspace Administration regarding its hot search rankings and has committed to implementing corrective measures [1] Group 1: Company Response - The company has taken the matter seriously and has accepted the penalties imposed by the regulatory authority [1] - A special team has been established to address the specific issues identified by the Cyberspace Administration, focusing on improving the management of the hot search rankings [1] - Kuaishou aims to enhance the standardization and diversity of the content in its hot search rankings as part of its rectification efforts [1] Group 2: Future Commitments - The company will continue to proactively accept supervision from users and society to foster a clearer online environment [1] - Kuaishou intends to use this opportunity to strengthen its content management responsibilities and improve its overall governance mechanisms [1]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article emphasizes the dual role of AI in enhancing network security while also presenting new risks, highlighting the need for proactive governance and technological innovation [1][2] - The recent release of the "Artificial Intelligence Model Ecological Construction Gathering Area" policies in Zhuhai aims to support AI model development and innovation, establishing a sustainable network security ecosystem [3] - The policies include a maximum investment of 500 million yuan in "computing power vouchers" to reduce costs for enterprises and 100 million yuan in "model vouchers" to alleviate financial pressures on R&D and application of AI models [3] Group 2 - AI models are being actively explored by many tech and cybersecurity companies in China for applications in network security, including intelligent operation and automated risk management solutions [2] - The article suggests that the next step in the development of AI models should focus on creating collective public products that ensure safety, with recommendations for establishing a universal security model as an infrastructure service [3] - The emphasis is placed on using advanced technology to address security vulnerabilities rather than hindering technological progress, advocating for a development-driven approach to security challenges [2][3]