A pair of cousins had a dispute over a "borrowed" live broadcast account and sued the court to fight for the right to use the account. How to deal with online virtual property disputes and protect the legitimate property rights and interests of rights holders in accordance with the law?Let's take a look at the case concluded by the Guangzhou Internet Court.
Basic facts of the case
Xiaoyi borrowed her cousin Xiao Wang's ID number to register an account on a live broadcast platform, and has been using the account for live broadcasts, holding the live broadcast income of the account. Thanks to her efforts, the account has 3060,000 fans, becoming an anchor with a high "wealth level" and "star level" on the live broadcast platform. Later, Xiaoyi applied to the live broadcast platform to change the real-name authentication information of the live broadcast account, and the live broadcast platform found that the live broadcast subject of the account had always been Xiaoyi, so it changed the real-name authenticator to Xiaoyi. Cousin Xiao Wang believes that the live broadcast platform maliciously colluded with Xiaoyi to change the real-name authentication information of the account, which seriously infringed on her virtual property rights and interests, so she filed a lawsuit with the court, requesting that the live broadcast platform be ordered to change the real-name authenticator of the live broadcast account back to herself.
Xiao Yi argued that he was broadcasting live out of entertainment, and because his ID card was not around, he used Xiao Wang's account. It is the actual user of the live broadcast account, and the live broadcast platform is the owner. Although the live broadcast account is registered with Xiao Wang's identity information, it is not actually associated with Xiao Wang.
The live broadcast platform argued that Xiao Wang's illegal lending of the account constituted a breach of contract, and the platform had the right to restrict and terminate Xiao Wang's use of the live broadcast account, and had the right to establish a contractual relationship with the actual user Xiao Yi, change the real-name authenticator, and ensure that it met the management requirements of Internet live streaming services.
After trial, the court held that the live broadcast account is virtual property and should be protected by law. The object of property rights and interests of the account includes two parts: one is the account itself, and the other is the property rights and interests such as fans and traffic generated by the user's personalized use and operation of the account. According to the "Service Agreement" signed between the live broadcast platform and the user, Xiao Wang's transfer of the account to Xiaoyi without the platform's review is an illegal transfer, and the platform's termination of Xiao Wang's continued use of the account is a reasonable measure taken based on the agreement and rules, and does not constitute infringement. Xiaoyi has not been included in the blacklist of anchors in the online performance (live broadcast) industry, and the live broadcast platform and Xiaoyi have re-agreed that the right to use the account is enjoyed by Xiaoyi, and there is no violation of the prohibitions of laws and regulations. Moreover, the account is operated by Xiaoyi for a long time, which generates new property content such as the number of fans. This part of the property content originates from the audience's affirmation of Xiaoyi and its live broadcast content, is based on Xiaoyi's labor and management, and has a certain degree of personal dependence. The distribution of relevant property rights and interests to the creator is in line with the value orientation of earned income and is more equitable.
In summary, the court found that the live broadcast platform's act of changing the real-name authenticator did not constitute infringement, and ruled to reject all of Xiao Wang's claims. The verdict is now in force.
The judge's heart
Judge of the Civil Trial Division of the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court
Feng Libin
This case explores the transition from the "empowerment" thinking path to the "functional" thinking path, returns to the legislative purpose and social effect pursued by the law to protect virtual property, and resolves the "borrowed name" dispute in a function-oriented manner.
The registrant establishes a contractual relationship with the platform by agreeing to the service agreement, and both parties are bound by the agreement. If the Registrant transfers the account to another person without informing the Platform, the Platform is not aware that the service object has changed, and its true intention is still to establish a contractual relationship with the Registrant. Therefore, judging from the appearance of the contract, the registrant has the right to use the account during the period when the real-name authenticator of the account is the registrant. However, if the actual user creates or enhances the virtual property of the account through personal labor, does he enjoy the benefits of the virtual property attached to the account?How to protect the property interests of the actual user?
In this case, the registrant transferred the account in breach of contract, and the live streaming platform had the right to terminate the performance of the contract in accordance with the service agreement, and had the right to enter into a new contract with the user for the account. The following two aspects should be considered in the protection of virtual assets attached to accounts: First, the contribution of each party to the formation of online virtual assets should be determined based on the principle of fairness. An important feature of online virtual property is that it has value, and civil subjects have paid labor to obtain the corresponding value. Giving the rights and interests of virtual property to the party who pays the labor is in line with the principle of fairness, and is also in line with the value orientation of encouraging labor and encouraging the creation of social wealth. The second is to start from the principle of efficiency and maximize the economic value of network virtual property. The cost of registering a new account is low, and it is advisable to abandon the account, which will cause a waste of virtual assets attached to the account.
Judicial adjudication shall respect the law of the development of virtual property and balance the interests of all parties. Internet platforms should also further improve the management of the real-name system, improve the accuracy of real-name supervision, and truly achieve "real names" and "real people", and effectively combat acts that evade supervision.
[Expert Comments].
Professor, Peking University Law School
Director of the E-Commerce Law Research Center of Peking University
Xue Jun
"Borrowed name" live broadcast is a new problem in the development of the new format of online live broadcasting. This case involves not only the determination of the ownership of online virtual property, but also the supervision of real-name authentication and the boundary of the autonomy of the platform, which are all hot and difficult issues in practice. The case changed the inherent thinking of "empowerment" of online virtual property, and from the legislative purpose of legal protection of virtual property and the social effect pursued, it incorporated the considerations of fairness, efficiency, and labor contribution theory, and effectively balanced the interests of all parties. In the absence of clarity in the relevant legal norms, the response to the protection of virtual property in this case has the effect of "filling in the rules", which is conducive to building a good order for the protection of virtual property and economic development, and is also conducive to promoting the platform to earnestly implement the online real-name system and optimize the construction of the business environment in the field of digital economy.
[**Supreme People's Court].
Statement: The copyright of this article belongs to the original author, if there is a mistake or infringement of your legitimate rights and interests, you can contact us by email, and we will deal with it in a timely manner. E-mail address: [email protected]