Analysis About The Confliction Between The Online Public Speech Surveillance And Reputation Right Of Legal Entity

Recently, with the rapid development of computer network, the platform ofnetwork information has exceeded gradually and replaced the traditional forms ofinformation dissemination, and it becomes the main platform of public accessing toinformation. In the new age of using network supervision by public opinion topromote the development and progress of democracy, because the correspondinginstitutional standard system has not been completed, it leads to the cases that legalperson and media are in court due to the inappropriate network supervision by publicopinion frequently, especially the cases that network supervision by public opinionson infringing the legal person’s reputation right. This will have great effects tosociety because of the high speed of information dissemination, specialty of legalperson’s social status and the large amount of involved compensation. Therefore howto properly deal with the dispute between network supervision by public opinion andthe legal person, has become an urgent problem.It is no doubt that building a set of thorough institutional standard system is thebest way to solve this dispute and contradiction. However, from the perspective ofour judiciary, there are still some prerequisite questions without proper resolutions.Such as the problems of differences in rights between network supervision by publicopinion and the traditional one, between the legal person’s and citizen’s reputationright, as well as the problem of differences in infringing reputation right according todifferent legal person, all these will be the obsessions to formulate relevant laws andregulations. Before these problems have been thoroughly studied, although therelevant regulations are worked out, it is also bound to cause the contradictions anddisputes of law application in practice.This paper selected thirteen cases happened in recent years, which were ever onthe internet causing a strong reaction of public opinion, the purpose is through theanalysis of these specific cases to study the problem of network supervision bypublic opinion about the current judicial practice, then in the perspective of the difficulties in judicial practice and make a summary analysis of the legislativedefects and judicial problems in terms of our network supervision by public opinioninfringing the legal person’s reputation right, so as to put forward some feasibleopinions to perfect the relevant legislation and improve the relevant institutions.This paper is mainly composed of six parts: the introduction primarilyintroduces the background and value of the topic in this paper, states the researchstatus of the problem in current academic world as a whole and also lists the ideasand methods of research in this paper. The first part is the analysis on status ofnetwork supervision by public opinion, its key point is to clarify all characteristics ofnetwork supervision by public opinion in the comparison with traditional mediasupervision, what’s more, it also sets out laws and regulations which current networksupervision by public opinion based on, and existing problems and contradictions.The second part aims to the nomological analysis of the legal person’s reputationright, this part accurately defines the commonness and characteristic of the legalperson’s and general citizen’s reputation right through identifying the connotationand denotation of concept of the legal person’s reputation right, and mainly analyzesthe methods of relief and compensation after the reputation right of legal person isinfringed. The third part focuses on the analysis of the reason that networksupervision by public opinion infringing the legal person’s reputation right results inand related forms of litigation, meanwhile this part introduces the harm which thedisputes and contradictions brings. The forth part analyzes common problems of thecases which network supervision by public opinion infringes the legal person’s rightreputation in Chinese juridical practice in terms of legislation and justice, and it alsoput forward some advice concerning the balance of network supervision by publicopinion and the legal person’s reputation right. The last part is conclusion.