Research On The Civil Liability Of News Media’s Infringing The Commercial Rights Of Personality

The field of personality rights in recent years there has been some newchanges, one of which is the commercialization of personality rights as well as withthe concept of The Human Dignity. The author tries on the basis of the results ofprevious theoretical studies, research and press against the civil liability of TheHuman Dignity.News against The Human Dignity of civil liability system to resolve is whenthe right to freedom of expression and The Human Dignity conflict, the law shouldprotect the rights of the main The Human Dignity will not be violated, whilemaintaining a balance of freedom of the press (freedom citizens the right to freedomof expression in the field of manifestation). To analyze in this paper, the balance ofthis conflict the main line, a case about commercial phenomenon of personality rightsin the social life as well as related legislative, judicial, and then explain theconnotation and extension of The Human Dignity and On this basis, the depth of thepress against The Human Dignity The Human Dignity of the specific form and pressagainst civil liability for the theoretical basis. Finally, this paper tries to build China’spress and civil liability against Shoji moral rights Elements defenses system.Throughout the full text of this article concluded: First, the way to The HumanDignity of moral rights in the economic interests of connotation to be sure, in order tobe positive protection or in the news tort system within the framework of the tortsystem to improve the news media the way the personality rights of the Commercialappropriate protection. Civil constituent elements of the personality rights of the pressagainst Shoji, to highlight the fault and the actual damage two elements involved inthe public interest (such as reports of listed companies); in the content of the report, toestablish actual malice and actual harm principle, and to carry out this principle injudicial practice, even if untrue statements, the court cannot use the "presumption offault" and "harm presumption". Thirdly, the news value and the respondent as the defenses of the media to obviate or mitigate the responsibility of the news media.Fourth, the burden of proof should strictly implement the "who advocates, whom theburden of proof" principle, the burden of proof by the plaintiff, the authenticity of thecontent of infringement reports.