Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has released 12 typical cases that protect the legitimate rights and interests of private enterprises and entrepreneurs, highlighting the importance of accountability in online product reviews [1][2]. Group 1: Case Summary - A digital blogger, Jiang, with over 100,000 followers, published false reviews about a terminal company's electronic products without actual testing, using derogatory terms [1]. - The court ruled that Jiang's comments lacked objective basis and were malicious, constituting an infringement of the terminal company's reputation [1][2]. - Jiang was ordered to apologize and pay 60,000 yuan in damages and over 26,000 yuan in reasonable expenses, with the judgment becoming effective as neither party appealed [2]. Group 2: Industry Implications - Product reviews are a market evaluation method in the internet economy, where reviewers should base their opinions on actual testing and exercise reasonable care when sharing information [2]. - The court's ruling emphasizes the responsibility of reviewers to avoid misleading information that could harm the reputation of producers and disrupt market order [2]. - This case serves as a precedent for regulating false reviews online and protecting the legitimate rights of enterprises [2].

Core Points - The Supreme People's Court ruled that a digital influencer, who published false product reviews without testing, infringed on a company's reputation and must bear liability for the defamation [1][2] - The case highlights the importance of accurate product reviews in the internet economy and the responsibility of reviewers to base their opinions on actual testing and reasonable verification [2] Group 1 - A digital influencer with over 100,000 followers published derogatory reviews of a company's electronic products without conducting any actual tests, using terms like "garbage" to demean the products [1][2] - The court found that the influencer's comments lacked objective basis and were malicious, exceeding reasonable evaluation principles [2] - The influencer was ordered to apologize, pay 60,000 yuan in damages, and cover reasonable expenses of over 26,000 yuan, with the judgment becoming effective without appeal [2] Group 2 - The Supreme Court emphasized that product reviews serve as a market evaluation method in the internet economy, providing consumers with decision-making references [2] - Reviewers must ensure their statements are based on genuine testing results and exercise due diligence when sharing information to avoid misleading the public and harming the reputation of producers and operators [2] - The ruling is significant for regulating false review behaviors online and protecting the legitimate rights of enterprises [2]