Do you remember Wu Yongning, the former anchor of Zanthoxylum bungeanum? Because of the performance of high-altitude programs and lead to falling, caused netizens hot discussion. On May 21, the Beijing Internet court handed down the judgment of the first instance in the case of extreme sports enthusiast Wu Yongning's family suing 'pepper live' platform. Previously, his son Wu Yongning climbed a high-rise building and died because he believed that the platform did not perform a reasonable duty to review and supervise the highly dangerous videos released by users. His family member he sued Beijing Mijing Hefeng Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Mijing Hefeng company") to the court for an apology and compensation for a total of 6 losses on the grounds of network infringement liability Ten thousand yuan.
According to the first instance judgment of the court, Mijing Hefeng company should bear the responsibility of network infringement, and compensate the plaintiff 30000 yuan for various losses such as spiritual damages.
The family accused the live broadcast platform of failing to warn and stop the son's fall
When he sued, he said that since 2017, Wu Yongning has released a large number of high-risk videos, such as unarmed climbing tall buildings, on major mainstream network platforms such as' Zanthoxylum live broadcast 'of Mijing Hefeng company, with a total number of views of more than 300 million people, so he has millions of fans.
On November 8, 2017, Wu Yongning fell to death while climbing Huayuan International Center in Changsha.
He believes that the company knows that the videos released by Wu Yongning are shot at the risk of his life, and accidents are likely to happen in the shooting process. However, in order to improve the popularity, reputation and user participation of his network platform, the defendant did not warn and stop Wu Yongning's behavior, nor did he delete the dangerous videos , shielding, disconnection and other necessary measures. Moreover, when Wu Yongning died, he was in the signing period with Zanthoxylum bungeanum live broadcast.
As the defendant, Mijing Hefeng company argued that the behavior of providing information storage space on Zanthoxylum platform does not have the possibility of infringing Wu Yongning's personal rights in real space, and it is not an infringement. The video content uploaded by Wu Yongning is not prohibited by laws and regulations, and he has no legal obligation to deal with it.
At the same time, the defendant said that it did not instruct Wu Yongning to do a challenge project beyond his challenge ability or not good at, and the promotion cooperation between the company and Wu Yongning on the new version of pepper live broadcast software was not harmful.
In addition, Wu Yongning, as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, has become famous for his repeated success in extreme challenges. He should be considered to have certain capacity for extreme challenges. The defendant did not ask or allow him to challenge with knowledge or due knowledge that Wu Yongning did not have the ability to challenge, and did not have subjective tort fault.
Court: if the platform fails to give a safety prompt, it should bear minor responsibility
As for the determination of the defendant's security obligation, the court held that the network service provider, as the manager, operator and organizer of the cyberspace, also has a certain security obligation to the network users in the virtual cyberspace under certain circumstances. Therefore, the network service provider may be liable for network infringement due to its failure to fulfill the security obligation, but the content is different Different from the content of security obligations under the traditional physical space, it should only include audit, notification, deletion, shielding, disconnection and other measures.
Therefore, the defendant in this case, jinghefeng company, should have certain security obligations for network users in cyberspace.
As a network service provider of information storage space, Zanthoxylum bungeanum live broadcasting platform is profitable and shares the reward income with Wu Yongning, so it should bear the corresponding security obligations.
Most of the videos uploaded by Wu Yongning on the platform are high-altitude dangerous videos, and he did not wear protective equipment during climbing and performing high-altitude dangerous actions. The defendant once invited Wu Yongning to participate in the endorsement activities. It can be seen that he knew the danger of Wu's video content and could predict the possible dangerous results. However, the defendant failed to delete, block and disconnect the dangerous video uploaded by Wu, which was due to his failure to fulfill his security obligation. At the same time, the defendant did not give a safety warning to Wu Yongning, so he was at fault for Wu Yongning's death.
At the same time, the Court pointed out that the defendant's review obligation should be a 'passive' review when he knows or should know that the uploaded video content may be dangerous and may have risks, rather than an active review obligation. Otherwise, the platform's excessive review obligation will be imposed, resulting in excessive operating costs and not conducive to the development of the industry.
Beijing Internet court finally found that the defendant should bear the corresponding network tort liability for Wu Yongning's death, but Wu Yongning himself should bear the most important responsibility for his death. The defendant's responsibility for Wu Yongning's death is secondary and minor, and the defendant should compensate the plaintiff for various losses, totaling 30000 yuan.