Recently, attorneys Zhang Yanfeng and Zheng Xuan of King&Capital Law Firm received the judgment in an online infringement liability dispute case they represented. While the client was physically and mentally exhausted due to cyberbullying, the legal team, through meticulous evidence collection and precise legal arguments, ultimately secured justice for the client. The judgment not only restored the client’s reputation but also provided a vivid judicial illustration of the principle that “the internet is not a lawless zone.”
This image shows the client presenting a commemorative banner inscribed with the words: “Beijing Has King&Capital Law Firm, the Law Has Discernment.”
Case Background
This case is a typical online defamation dispute. The plaintiff, a well-known writer and educator, faced widespread online harassment triggered by the malicious misinterpretation and incitement of the defendant, Liu (an “online influencer” with over 6 million followers). The defendant maliciously misinterpreted specific targets of criticism in the plaintiff’s writings, particularly by falsely accusing the plaintiff of “insulting patriotic citizens” to incite netizens; repeatedly used insulting language to attack the plaintiff; and even publicly disclosed the plaintiff’s and their family’s private information (“doxxing”), resulting in the plaintiff enduring years of online harassment.
Due to the defendant’s infringing acts and the resulting online harassment, the plaintiff has been under prolonged psychological stress, and his normal life has been completely disrupted. This undeserved ordeal not only subjected the plaintiff to immense psychological torment but also led to his dismissal from the position of principal—forcing him to leave the classroom he had loved for many years—as the defendant and others repeatedly tagged the relevant authorities in the plaintiff’s city, putting pressure on the government. Consequently, a heavy shadow has been cast over his professional career. For many years thereafter, the plaintiff lived in the shadow of that storm, her innermost hope being that everything would eventually settle down with the passage of time. She tried hard to forget, forcing herself to engage in a long and painful psychological battle against that unbearable experience, attempting to rebuild inner order from the ruins. However, the wounds inflicted by that wave of online abuse did not truly heal with the passage of time; instead, they remained like a rusty nail deeply embedded in her heart, causing excruciating pain with every touch. It was not until last year, driven by a complex mix of emotions too profound for words, that she mustered the courage to search for those old posts—only to discover, to her shock, that the malicious attacks and defamatory remarks had not vanished; the defendant had not even deleted the core infringing text. The storm of that time seemed never to have ceased; she had merely, in her own wishful thinking, sealed it away.
The plaintiff was well aware that fighting back might provoke a new round of incitement and attacks from the defendant, leaving her in a dilemma. Out of concern that the situation might escalate, she had attempted to communicate with the defendant to request the removal of the posts, only to be flatly refused. This harsh reality made her fully realize: compromise and avoidance cannot bring true relief; only by facing the storm head-on can she pull out that long-buried nail. Ultimately, with the encouragement and support of her family, she decided to break her silence and resolutely retained a lawyer from King&Capital Law Firm, vowing to defend her rights with the weapons of the law.
Case Overview
The key to breaking the deadlock lay in stripping the defendant—a “social media influencer”—of their aura of popularity, using irrefutable evidence to restore the truth, and overcoming the challenges of gathering evidence across different regions and time periods. Faced with the defendant’s massive fan base and potential bias in online public opinion, the legal team did not back down. They understood that amid the clamor fueled by online traffic, only by constructing a solid chain of evidence and rigorous legal logic could they cut through the fog and secure justice for their client.
Throughout the case, the legal team adopted a two-pronged strategy of “psychological counseling” and “evidence preservation”: On one hand, they carefully addressed the client’s emotional trauma, helping them rebuild confidence and resolutely avoid the passive trap of “proving their own innocence”; on the other hand, they swiftly deployed a comprehensive online evidence-gathering operation, notarizing and preserving infringing comments scattered across various platforms. They successfully secured key evidence demonstrating the defendant’s acts of insult, defamation, privacy disclosure, and the resulting cyberbullying, laying a solid foundation for the litigation.
The core challenge of this case lay in establishing the defendant’s liability and demonstrating the legal causation. During the trial, the defendant attempted to use “freedom of speech” and “public scrutiny of public figures” as a shield to confuse the issue. In response, the legal team conducted in-depth legal research and presented a detailed analysis of the legal boundaries of freedom of speech to the court, forcefully demonstrating that the defendant’s actions had far exceeded the scope of normal criticism and discussion, constituting malicious defamation and insult. After multiple rounds of intense courtroom debate, the legal team successfully established a direct causal relationship between the defendant’s infringing acts and the plaintiff’s reputational damage and emotional distress.
Ultimately, after a comprehensive review of the evidence and a careful examination of the legal principles, the court issued a judgment in favor of the plaintiff’s claims. To date, the defendant has not filed an appeal, and the judgment has officially taken effect and entered the enforcement phase.
Case Summary
From the filing of the case to its conclusion, this matter spanned a year and a half of arduous legal battles. Reflecting on the representation throughout the case, the attorneys recognize that this is not merely a legal victory, but a powerful rebuke against cyberbullying. Cyberspace is by no means a “lawless zone”; yet in reality, many “influencers” and “talk show hosts” continue to exploit their massive followings to incite emotions, turning netizens into weapons of attack; Those seeking to defend their rights are often forced into a quagmire of constantly having to “prove their innocence,” and under the overwhelming aura of the opposing party’s massive online following, an individual’s rational arguments often appear feeble and powerless, unable to reverse the established fact of having been subjected to cyberbullying. The victory in this case was achieved precisely to break this deadlock and ensure that the law serves as a solid shield to protect human dignity.
It is worth noting that the lead attorney in this case, Zhang Yanfeng, previously represented the plaintiff in the 2008 “first cyberbullying case (the first doxxing case).” That landmark case established the legal boundaries for cyberbullying and doxxing. Years later, Attorney Zhang’s representation in this type of online infringement case marks not only a “return” to his legal roots but also a continued testament to the progress of the rule of law in the digital realm.
As this case profoundly reveals: initiating cyberbullying often requires nothing more than a light touch of the keyboard, with a few words sufficient to vent one’s anger; yet for the victim, it becomes an unbearable burden in real life. In recent years, the “Two Highs and One Ministry” have intensively released numerous typical cases involving cyberbullying, covering multiple dimensions from civil infringement to criminal offenses. This series of measures aims to clearly delineate the legal boundaries of online conduct and serve as a stern warning to those with ulterior motives: the internet is by no means a breeding ground for reckless behavior. Any act of fabricating facts, spreading rumors, or inciting conflict—once severe enough—will inevitably cross the legal line and may even constitute criminal offenses such as the crime of provoking trouble, resulting in severe legal punishment.
Here, we urge the public: In the face of complex and ever-changing online public opinion, remain rational and composed. Allow the truth to take its course; do not blindly follow the crowd or jump on the bandwagon, and refuse to become an enabler of cyberbullying. For those who have unfortunately fallen victim to online violence—such as “doxxing” (exposure of personal information), insults, or defamation—please cast aside your fear and courageously wield the weapons of the law. Resolutely defend your legitimate rights and interests through means such as notarized evidence collection and filing lawsuits.
King&Capital Law Firm will continue to uphold our professional ethos, remain undaunted by rumors and slander, and steadfastly uphold our faith in the rule of law. We will safeguard every instance of justice with solid legal services, dedicated to ensuring that every client can live with peace of mind and dignity under the light of the rule of law.
This photo was taken during the second-instance trial of the “first doxxing case” in 2008. The second person from the right is Attorney Zhang Yanfeng.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
