The Criminal Law Regulates The Dissemination Of False Facts That Damage The Reputation Of Other

It is not difficult to see from the expression of Article 246 of the Criminal Law that the dual implementation of “fabricating false facts and spreading them” is the basic constituent element of traditional defamation.In the field of network defamation,the “Interpretation” issued by the “Two Highs” equates the single act of“knowing that others are fabricating and spreading it themselves” with the dual act of“fabricating and spreading it themselves” in the Criminal Law.The conflict between these two regulations has caused long-term discussions in academia,and there is no conclusion in the Criminal Law provisions.Currently,one view believes that the act of “single fabrication” will not cause reputational damage to others,and should be regarded as a preparatory act of spreading,that is,a preparatory act,so this single act of spreading should be independently used as a constituent element of defamation;another view believes that “self-fabrication and self-spreading” is a coherent whole,and the two are indispensable.Therefore,both front and back behaviors should be used as constituent elements of defamation.Network defamation crime is a derivative product of traditional defamation crime in the network era.In order to more comprehensively combat defamation crimes,this “Interpretation” has considerable significance for the times,but this judicial interpretation equates the act of“fabrication” with the act of “fabrication and spreading”,which not only exceeds the original interpretation of legislative provisions,but also violates legislative authority issues.To solve this conflict,single-spreading behavior should be directly regulated in criminal legislation to fully protect citizens’ legitimate rights and interests.