The Influence Of Law And Practice Of The U.K. And The U.S. Have On China In Terms Of The Protection Of Reputation In Weibo

As part of right of reputation, reputation in Weibo not only has general characters, butalso some special qualities of its own. Therefore, traditioinal law regulating right ofreputation also applies to Weibo. However, current law is so obsolete that numerouslegal issues arising from Weibo cannot be solved. For instance, how to define theidentity of plaintiff? In what form does infringement of right of reputation in Weiboexist? How does law balance freedom of speech and right of reputation when bothrights conflict with each other? Which outweighs, right of supervision of citizens, orright of reputation of officials? Should ordinary citizens and public figures be treateddifferently in terms of the protection of right of reputation? What responsibility shouldthe network service provider take for the infringement? How to determine the right ofjurisdiction? The U.K. and the U.S. enjoy a long history in libel law, and bothcountries develop their own featured principles with repect to libel. After stepping intoInternet era, they take more actions to reform and innovate respective libel laws, fromwhich China shall absorb more experience. Therefore, this article analyses from fouraspects.Part One discusses the basics of right of reputation in Weibo. By analysing a typical case in Weibo, a series of questions are raised, following which relevant knowledgeregarding the definition and characters of right of reputation in Weibo are introducedin graphic detail.Part Two involves the constitutive requirements and the form of liability of theinfringement of reputation in Weibo. The enforcement of Section36of the Tort Lawof China, which provides basic principles of assigning responsibilities of networkservice provider–“Notice” and “Awareness”–comforms to the historical trend of thetime.Part Three introduces different kinds of cases that played of great importance role inthe history of the U.K. and the U.S., due to which some vital rules that are still in usecurrently arise as the times require. Besides, the comparison of libel law of bothcountries will help illustrate a full picture of their rules in order to help China absorbthe essence in practice.Part Four focuses on the legal suggestions through the conclusion made from the lawand the practice of the U.K. and the U.S.. Prinples, such as “actual damage”,“publicinterest”,“honest opinion”,“public figure” and so forth, are all worth being applied toChina legal practice.