Shulou(Shulou.com)11/24 Report--

CTOnews.com, February 7, according to the Hangzhou Internet Court, recently, the court ruled on two cases involving the extraction of green energy from ant forests.

Case 1: buy green energy, turn on the trumpet to "water" …... Which "tree planting" acts constitute a breach of contract?

In the ant forest, users can interact with their friends by watering each other and transfer the stored "green energy" to other accounts. As a user of Ant Forest, Zhao (a pseudonym) has registered five accounts, four of which are specifically used to "water" the main account to get more "green energy".

CTOnews.com learned that in the process of using ant forest, Zhao bought "green energy" from others many times, and multiple accounts took the same number of steps at the same time to get almost the same amount of "green energy". At the same time, Zhao obtained a number of "green energy" by repeatedly paying water and electricity bills and refunding them. Then, several accounts of Zhao were temporarily restricted from using the ant forest.

Zhao thought that the Ant Group had taken improper measures to restrict the rights of its account, so he sued the court and asked to release the restricted account in his name. Ant Group believes that Zhao's acquisition of "green energy" violates the agreement of "instructions for Ant Forest users" and runs counter to the public welfare attribute, and there is no basis for its request to unseal the account.

The referee wants something.

The court held that the case was a dispute over the network service contract. Zhao voluntarily opened the ant forest service and accepted the instructions for the use of ant forest users as his true intention that the content of the agreement does not violate the mandatory provisions of national laws and administrative regulations, is legal and effective, and is legally binding, both parties shall fully perform their respective rights and obligations in accordance with the agreement.

According to the "guidelines for the use of Ant Forest users", if Zhao buys or sells green energy or watering services, he can obtain green energy through false co-breeding, false green travel, false transactions and other dishonest ways to obtain green energy. or there is improper behavior of using ant forest products or services for other commercial purposes The ant group may take measures such as restricting or prohibiting the use of all or part of the services of the ant forest on its ant forest account.

In objective reality, Zhao, as an individual, can only produce one actual number of travel steps on the same day. In the absence of the same number of trips, Zhao uses the behavior of repeatedly switching different accounts to obtain additional energy values that do not actually exist, which is contrary to the principle of good faith, so it is not improper for Ant Group to temporarily restrict Zhao's login on the grounds of this. And the severity of the measure is commensurate with Zhao's behavior. The court finally rejected Zhao's claim.

After the verdict was pronounced in the first instance, neither of the parties appealed, and the judgment has now come into force.

Case 2: what is the responsibility for self-media to distort and smear public welfare projects?

In 2021, Company A posted an article on its self-media account, saying that ant forest operators "sold emission targets to heavily polluting enterprises to pollute the environment" and "vigorously promoted their social responsibility". The article was read more than 70,000 times. Subsequently, Company B reprinted and diffused the article through the account associated with the above account. Related topics have sparked a heated discussion on the Internet.

The Ant Group believes that the above article statement has no factual basis, resulting in serious damage to the goodwill of the Ant Forest Project and the Ant Group, so it sued the two companies to the court on the grounds of reputation infringement, demanding that the infringement be stopped immediately, apologize and compensate for the loss of 1 yuan.

Referee result

After hearing, the court held that according to Article 1024 of the Civil Code of the people's Republic of China, the civil subject enjoys the right of reputation. No organization or individual may infringe upon the reputation of others by means of insult or slander. The Ant Forest project aims to promote low-carbon life, call for energy conservation and emission reduction, and improve the environment. It is a valuable and meaningful public welfare activity, and its legitimate rights and interests should be protected by law. The defendant Company An and Company B issued articles related to the project without credible source basis to describe the relevant facts of the project, which constituted a false statement, and pointed directly at the main body of ant forest management at the beginning of the article. At the same time, the articles involved in the case existed in the Internet space for a long time. Only the official account has been read by more than 70,000 people, which has been reprinted and forwarded by other self-media and circulated on many platforms, resulting in great adverse effects. The reputation right of the plaintiff Ant Group is derogated and constitutes a reputation infringement. In the end, the court ordered Company An and Company B to publicly apologize to the plaintiff Ant Group on their self-media accounts and national news media, eliminate the impact, and compensate for economic losses of 1 yuan.

After the verdict was pronounced in the first instance, neither of the parties appealed, and the judgment has now come into force.

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.