人格权纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例

本期双语案例推送南怀瑾诉中央编译出版社侵害姓名权、名誉权案等有关人格权纠纷类案例。 目录 Contents 1.南怀瑾诉中央编译出版社侵害姓名权、名誉权案 Nan Huaijin v. Central Compilation & Translation Press (case regarding dispute over infringement upon the right of name and reputation) 2.广东新快报社诉南方日报社名誉权案 Guangdong New Express v. Nanfang Daily (case regarding dispute over right of reputation) 3.张艺谋诉华夏出版社、黄晓阳名誉侵权案 Zhang Yimou v. Huaxia Publishing House and Huang Xiaoyang (case regarding dispute over infringement upon the right of reputation)

一、南怀瑾诉中央编译出版社侵害姓名权、名誉权案

Nan Huaijin v. Central Compilation & Translation Press (case regarding dispute over infringement upon the right of name and reputation)

【裁判要旨】

姓名权是公民依法享有的决定、使用、变更自己的姓名并要求他人尊重自己姓名的一种人格权利。他人对姓名权的侵害形式主要表现为非法使用当事人的姓名。然而，应当区分使用行为的性质。姓名是用于确定和代表自然人个人并与其他人相区别的符号和标识。日常生活中，人们使用他人姓名的主要目的都是为了进行指称当事人，从而将此主体与彼主体区分开来。这种使用是社会交往中不可避免的行为，属于合理和正当的使用。侵害姓名权的使用行为，主要是以营利为目的使用，或者以非法目的使用，比如盗用、冒用等。因此，他人未经当事人允许，在其出版图书中使用当事人姓名的，需要区别使用的性质，如果仅仅是在指代主体身份的意义上使用，该行为就不构成侵犯姓名权的行为。

[Judgment Abstract]

The right of name is a personal right enjoyed by a citizen in accordance with law to determine, use and change his/her personal name and ask others to respect the name. The infringement upon the name right of a citizen is mainly reflected in the illegal use of the name. However, the nature of use should be considered. The name refers to a symbol or mark used to identify and represent the natural person and distinguish him from others. In daily life, people mainly use the name of another person for referring to the person so as to distinguish him from others. Such kind of name use is inevitable in social communications, which should be deemed as reasonable and legal use of others' names. The infringement upon the right of name or the use of others' name mainly refer to the name use for profits or illegal purposes, such as misappropriation or counterfeiting. Therefore,where a person uses the name of others in his publications, the nature of such use should be determined. If the name is only used for identity reference, the infringement upon the right of name is not constituted.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.7207037

[CLI Code] CLI.C.7207037(EN)

二、广东新快报社诉南方日报社名誉权案

Guangdong New Express v. Nanfang Daily (case regarding dispute over right of reputation)

【裁判摘要】

媒体应当对自己原创的文章承担审慎核查义务，最大程度确保文章不出现侵犯他人权利的情形。否则，应当承担相应的责任。但是，对于转载媒体的责任，不应当完全按照原创媒体的标准认定，尤其是我国目前对新闻媒体的设立采用严格的审批机制，可以推定新闻媒体的报道有较高的可信性，对于转载媒体而言，其他新闻媒体也可算作是一个可信的信息来源。但是，从结果上来看，转载媒体的转载行为确实扩大了信息的传播面和受众范围，对侵权后果的扩大起到了作用。因此，新闻媒体转载其他媒体的新闻报道后，该新闻报道出现侵害名誉权纠纷时，既不能绝对免除转载媒体的责任，又不能对转载媒体施加过重的责任，应当根据案情要求转载媒体承担低于原媒体的责任。

[Judgment Abstract]

A media should fulfill the duty of prudential verification of its original articles, and ensure that the articles do not infringe upon the rights of others to the greatest extent. Otherwise, the media should undertake the liability for infringement as a result. Nevertheless, such liability should not be determined according to the standards for original media. In particular, as China adopts a strict approval mechanism for the establishment of a news media, it is commonly presumed that media news reports are of high reliability. Thus, for a reproducing media, other news media can also be regarded as a credible source of information. However, the results show that the news reproduction has indeed expanded the spread of information and attracted more audience, which may lead to the expanded consequences of infringement. Therefore,when a news report is involved in a dispute over the infringement upon the right of reputation after being reproduced by other news media, the liability to be duly undertaken by the original media should be lowered in accordance with the facts of case, as it is prohibited in laws to exempt the reproducing media from liability and pose severer liabilities on it.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.7207106

[CLI Code] CLI.C.7207106 (EN)

三、张艺谋诉华夏出版社、黄晓阳名誉侵权案

Zhang Yimou v. Huaxia Publishing House and Huang Xiaoyang (case regarding dispute over infringement upon the right of reputation)

【裁判要旨】

最高人民法院发布的《关于审理名誉权案件若干问题的解答》中，将未经他人同意，擅自公布他人隐私的行为定性为侵害名誉权。公众人物，是指一定范围内具有重要影响，为人们所广泛知晓和关注，并与社会公众利益密切相关的人物。由于公众人物所承负着更多的社会责任与义务，其必然会受到社会舆论的关注、监督甚至是批评，其自身所享有的权利也会因此受到一定程度的影响，对此，公众人物应该负有一定程度的容忍义务。但是，尽管如此，仍应对公众人物的私人生活信息给予必要的保护，无论是社会媒体还是普通公民，在公开传播公众人物相关信息时仍应秉持谨慎、客观的态度，同时说明信息的合法来源，以免错误地描述了公众人物的人格形象，进而使社会公众产生误读。因而，未经本人同意，擅自披露公众人物的私生活信息，使社会公众产生误读的，构成对公众人物名誉权的侵害。

[Judgment Abstract]

In accordance with the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues about the Trial of Cases Concerning the Right of Reputation, the act of disclosing one's privacy without consent shall constitute an infringement on one's right of reputation. Public figures refer to those who have important influence in certain field, and are widely known and celebrated by the public and closely associated with social public interests. As public figures bear more social responsibilities and obligations, they are subject to the attention, supervision and even criticism of the public, and accordingly their legal rights will be affected to a certain extent, for which public figures should undertake their tolerance obligations. Nevertheless, the information on privacy of public figures should still be protected by law. Whoever, social media or ordinary citizens, should release information on public figures in a prudent and objective stance, and add the legal sources of the information at the meantime, so that the released information will not cause the misunderstanding of the public to the personalities of the public figure because of the false representation. Therefore,where a person willfully discloses the privacy of a public figure without consent, and causes misunderstanding of the public to the public figure, such act should constitute an infringement upon the right of reputation of the public figure.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.840567

[CLI Code] CLI.C.840567 (EN)

更多详情请关注我们的海外社交平台，有更多的双语资讯内容等着您！（PS：Facebook和Twitter需要外网访问权限）

LinkedIn

北京北大英华

科技有限公司

LinkedIn

PKULaw

Chinalawinfo

Facebook

PKULaw

Chinalawinfo

Twitter

PKULaw

Chinalawinfo

-END-

责任编辑 | 吴晓婧

稿件来源 | 北大法宝英文编辑组（Mani）

审核人员 | 张文硕

往期精彩回顾

▼

北大法宝

北大法律信息网

法宝学堂

法宝智能