I want to ask. Posting other people's home addresses on the forum without their permission. Is it infringement?

The concept of privacy is still unclear.

Lawyer Dong Yongsen, chairman of all china lawyers association Information Network and High-tech Professional Committee and executive director of China Software Alliance, believes that reputation and privacy are different concepts in law. The "nine prohibitions" in the Measures for the Administration of Internet Information only stipulate the situation of "insulting or slandering others and infringing on their legitimate rights and interests" in Item 8, which involves reputation, but does not stipulate privacy.

There is no clear concept of "privacy" in civil law. In this case, it is undoubtedly a "great challenge" to ask the Internet to assume the regulatory responsibility of protecting personal privacy.

■ Expertise * * *

Freedom of speech on the Internet should be fully protected.

Zhao Xiaoli believes that the Internet is a very convenient channel for China citizens to fully enjoy their freedom of speech. At the national policy level, people support, agree with and participate in comments published through the Internet, and it is absolutely unnecessary to change the review of Internet-related comments to afterwards.

In addition, several experts also agreed and stressed that the Internet should not bear the obligation of speech supervision, and the legal platform for freedom of speech on the Internet should be fully protected.

■ Focus problem

Is the phone number private?

Professor Liu Deliang, an expert in network law research at Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, believes that personal information with communication functions such as telephone number, work address and home address should be used for communication itself. If this information is published, it will not constitute an infringement of privacy. He said that the right to privacy should be defined in a narrow sense, that is, personal information that "will be harmful once published" does not need to be followed up, such as publishing the details of husband and wife's life.

The publication of address, telephone number and other information is often caused by subsequent "abuse", rather than the publication of telephone information itself.

Liu Deliang believes that the boundaries of privacy must be clearly defined in order to further discuss privacy issues related to the Internet. At the same time, he admits that his division is controversial in academic circles.

What caused the infringement?

Yao Hui, a law professor at Renmin University of China, believes that since infringement is discussed, we should discuss a causal relationship, such as whether the website publishes personal telephone number and home address, whether the behavior of the work unit causes infringement, and whether the publication of this information leads to subsequent results.

Professor Yao cited an example to illustrate that a man often received ambiguous spam messages, which were seen by his girlfriend many times, and his girlfriend could not bear to break up with him. Can you simply think that spam messages caused the two to break up? Professor Yao expressed great doubt that it was only a "superficial" causal relationship.

Back on the Internet, what needs to be discussed is whether the sender should know or can foresee the consequences of infringement. If it is beyond foresight, it cannot be regarded as infringement.

Publishing the phone number is an indirect reason?

When defining the damage result, he agreed with Professor Liu Deliang that it depends on whether the damage needs to be proved. For example, you don't need to prove the damage when the photos are taken, and those that don't necessarily cause damage, such as telephone number and work unit, are actually far from the damage results, which is an indirect reason. Even if they have to bear the responsibility, it is a supplementary responsibility, and the specific amount should be reduced. Wang Xiaoqing, a reporter for the competitive newspaper.

■ Expert advice

The focus of legislation is to prohibit the abuse of information.

Liu Deliang said that personal information can be divided into two categories. One is personal basic information such as mobile phone number, education background and home address, and the other is information directly related to personal interests and personal dignity.

As the application of network technology, human flesh search itself is neutral. When using this technology platform, we must first abide by the relevant laws of information disclosure. For those information directly related to the personality rights of others, once published, it will damage the privacy rights of others. Putting personal information online is more about the abuse of information by netizens after the information is posted online.

Netizens scribbled on the wall of Wang Fei's house, infringing on his property rights, while insulting Faye Wong with his mobile phone number obtained online, infringing on his right to freedom of communication and personality. Therefore, he suggested that the current legislative focus should be on the abuse of netizens after the release of human flesh search information.

The network administrator needs to guide the search.

Dong Yongsen pointed out that privacy and privacy cannot be equated. Disclosing someone's personal information is not necessarily an invasion of personal privacy. Invasion of personal privacy refers to causing certain harm to the other party. Human flesh search has a certain relationship with personal privacy. Human flesh search may violate personal privacy, and cyber violence caused by human flesh search involves nominal rights.

Privacy and nominal rights are two different legal concepts. On April 1 2008, the Supreme Court announced the relevant provisions on the cause of action of civil cases, involving disputes over personality rights. In the dispute of personality right, the fourth explanation is the right of name, and the sixth explanation is the right of privacy, so the two are not unified in jurisprudence. "Human flesh search" may infringe on privacy, but it does not necessarily infringe on nominal rights.

Lawyer Dong believes that human flesh search has both positive and negative aspects. The most important thing is that the network supervision department should have a legal restriction on it, and the poster has the right to exercise his right to speak, but the premise is that it will not cause harm to others. Network administrators should judge the purpose of searchers, minimize the occurrence of negative situations and guide the "human flesh search" to develop positively. Competitive newspaper reporter Li Jiaqiu Qin Xiao