From what aspect does the Decision on Maintaining Internet Security define illegal and criminal acts based on the Internet?

The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate answered a reporter's question on "Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in Handling Criminal Cases of Defamation by Information Network": The criminal law of our country has stipulated the crimes of libel, provocation, extortion and illegal business operation. Why do the "two highs" give a special explanation to the crimes of libel, affray, extortion and illegal business operation committed by using information networks? A: In recent years, information technology has developed rapidly, and information networks, including communication networks and radio and television transmission coverage networks, with the Internet as the main body, have become increasingly popular and have become an indispensable part of people's work, study and life. Because of the openness, anonymity and convenience of information network, some lawless elements use information network as a new type of criminal platform, and commit crimes such as slander, trouble-making, extortion and illegal business operation at will, which infringes on citizens' legitimate rights and interests such as reputation and property rights, disrupts public order and market order, and causes serious social harm, which is deeply hated by the people and strongly reacted by all sectors of society. In order to meet the needs of cracking down on cyber crimes and respond to the voice of the broad masses of the people, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate formulated and promulgated this interpretation in a timely manner on the basis of long-term investigation, extensive consultation and scientific argumentation, which has important practical significance.

First, the need to protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens. Crimes such as libel and extortion committed on the information network, some infringe upon citizens' reputation rights, and some infringe upon citizens' property rights. Spreading rumors and rumors on the internet makes it difficult to distinguish between true and false information in cyberspace, and it also prevents netizens from obtaining real information from the information network. The Interpretation punishes crimes such as libel committed by using information networks according to law, which can provide justice for victims, restore their reputations, protect citizens' legitimate property from infringement, and provide a standardized, orderly and healthy network environment for the broad masses of the people. Second, it is the need to clarify the legal basis for effectively cracking down on crime. At present, criminal activities such as libel, affray, extortion and illegal business operations are rampant by using information networks. Compared with the above-mentioned crimes committed by traditional means, the above-mentioned crimes committed by using information networks in recent years have particularity in objective form, but such crimes undoubtedly have realistic social harm. Because network information has the characteristics of wide spread, fast spread and hard to eliminate, crimes such as libel committed by using information network have more serious social harm than crimes committed by traditional means. However, the criminal law of our country has no specific provisions on crimes such as defamation committed by using information networks, so there is a problem that the application of the law is not clear enough in practice. The Interpretation clarifies the conviction and sentencing standards for crimes such as libel, affray, extortion and illegal business operations committed by using information networks, which is conducive to unifying judicial standards and standardizing judicial behavior, and is conducive to the judicial organs to accurately and effectively crack down on such criminal activities according to law. Third, it is the need to maintain social public order. Cyberspace and real society have been integrated and inseparable.

Crimes such as using information network to make trouble have caused serious damage to social public order. In particular, fabricating false information, spreading it on the information network and making trouble together can easily lead to mass incidents and cause serious public disorder. The Interpretation has tightened the legal net of criminal law and cracked down on such crimes according to law, which is conducive to maintaining social public order and creating a good social environment for the broad masses of the people. Fourth, it is the need to protect citizens' right of expression and supervision. Citizens express their opinions on the information network according to law and exercise their constitutional rights, which are protected by Chinese laws. But the "freedom of speech" on the information network is not without boundaries. The laws of any country will not allow "freedom of speech" to slander others. The Interpretation clarifies the legal boundary of expressing opinions on the information network, and citizens can fully exercise the right of expression and supervision endowed by the Constitution according to law. Fifth, it is the need to promote the healthy development of information networks. Crimes such as libel, trouble-making, extortion, illegal business and so on committed by using the information network make the information network no longer a "pure land". There are even some professional "network pushers", which make information network rumor and rumor spreading become an organized criminal activity, leading to the "anomie" of information network order and affecting the normal economic and social order.

The promulgation of the Interpretation will help to standardize the network order, strengthen the daily supervision of information networks, intensify the rectification of illegal acts, and maintain the normal economic and social order. In fact, in order to strengthen the management of information network, China's legislature has previously issued relevant legal documents. In 2000, the NPC Standing Committee made the Decision on Safeguarding Internet Security, which clearly pointed out that anyone who uses the Internet to commit defamation, extortion and other acts, which constitutes a crime, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law. Under the background of the rapid development of information network, especially the obvious trend of "three networks in one" of Internet, communication network and radio and television transmission coverage network, in order to unify the application of the law, it is necessary to make judicial explanations on crimes such as libel, provocation, extortion and illegal business operation committed by using information network, and further clarify the specific conviction and sentencing standards. To sum up, the promulgation of the Interpretation is helpful to punish crimes such as libel, affray, extortion and illegal business operations committed by using information networks, which are generally concerned by all sectors of society at present, and conforms to the general expectations and urgent requirements of the broad masses of the people in the new period for punishing information network crimes according to law and standardizing the order of information networks. Q: What basic principles did the "two highs" follow in the process of formulating the Interpretation?

A: The Interpretation is an important legal document to punish crimes such as libel, trouble-making, extortion and illegal business operations committed by using information networks under the new situation. The "two highs" attach great importance to this and are very cautious. After more than a year's research, they extensively solicited opinions and suggestions from national legislatures, administrative organs, other judicial organs, experts and scholars and people from all walks of life, conducted serious research and argumentation, and revised and improved them repeatedly. Now it's finally finished. Generally speaking, the content of the interpretation conforms to the legislative spirit and social reality. In the process of formulating the Interpretation, the following principles were mainly followed. First, adhere to the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a crime and interpret it according to law. In the Interpretation, the specific criteria for conviction and sentencing are defined in strict accordance with the constitutive elements of the crime of defamation, provocation, extortion and illegal business operation stipulated in the Criminal Law, combined with the above-mentioned behavioral characteristics and actual harm of using information networks to commit crimes. Each article has a clear legal basis, conforms to the basic principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a crime, and embodies the basic requirements of legal interpretation. At the same time, the interpretation also clearly stipulates the criteria for determining the "serious circumstances" of related crimes and the criteria for determining the same crime, so as to ensure that cases are handled strictly according to law in practice. Secondly, the characteristics of cyber crime are systematically expounded. Crimes such as libel on information network are just new manifestations of traditional crimes such as libel in the network age, which are more harmful than traditional crimes such as libel. In practice, some people fabricate facts that damage the reputation of others, spread them on the information network and slander others; Some people fabricate false information, spread it on the information network, stir up trouble and disturb public order; Some people threaten or coerce others and ask for public or private property on the grounds of publishing or deleting information on the information network; There are also some so-called "network public relations companies" and "network promoters" who illegally seek economic benefits and collect money by providing posting services for fabricated false information on the information network, and so on. Crimes committed by using information networks, like crimes committed by traditional means, should also be convicted and punished in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law. In view of the crimes of libel, provocation, extortion and illegal business operation committed by the people by using information network, the Interpretation systematically expounds the social harmfulness of the above crimes according to the provisions of the criminal law, which provides a clear legal basis for cracking down on the above crimes according to law and accumulates useful experience for further deepening the legislation of information network crimes.

Third, based on the actual needs of the judiciary, scientific interpretation. With the development and popularization of information network, there have been some cases of libel or extortion by using information network in recent years. The people's court has convicted and punished the crime of libel or extortion, which has achieved good legal and social effects. Therefore, this interpretation is actually a scientific summary of judicial practice experience. In the process of formulating the Interpretation, we conducted a full investigation, solicited opinions and suggestions from all sides, and made an empirical analysis when determining the conviction and sentencing standards of related crimes. The specific provisions of the Interpretation are in line with judicial practice and have strong operability. Fourth, pay attention to education, publicity and guidance, and give full play to the role of interpretation. In the process of formulating the Interpretation, we adhered to the basic criminal policy of combining leniency with severity, paid equal attention to cracking down on crimes such as libel on information networks and protecting citizens' right of expression and supervision, and paid attention to the positive role of criminal means in prevention, standardization, education and guidance. Based on the current reality, the Interpretation will crack down on the related crimes committed by the people by using information networks, which will help to promote the relevant departments to strengthen the daily management of information networks, improve the prevention mechanism of cyber crimes, educate the majority of netizens to consciously regulate their online words and deeds, and achieve a good social effect of "cracking down on the very few and educating the majority". It can be seen that the Interpretation provides a strong legal guarantee for protecting the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations and maintaining social order. Q: Articles 1 to 3 of the Interpretation clarify the specific content of using information networks to commit defamation crimes. How to correctly grasp in practice?

A: Articles 1 to 3 of the Interpretation respectively stipulate the behavior mode, incrimination standard, public prosecution conditions and other issues of using information networks to commit libel crimes, which are important contents of the Interpretation. First of all, the first article of the Interpretation is divided into two paragraphs to clarify the act of using information networks to commit defamation crimes, that is, the identification of "fabricating facts to slander others". Specifically, it includes three ways of behavior: one is "fabricating communication", that is, the first paragraph.

(a) fabricating facts that damage the reputation of others, spreading them on the information network, or organizing or instructing others to spread them on the information network. The second is "tampering with communication", which is the first paragraph.

(2) The act of tampering with the original information content involving others on the information network as a fact that damages the reputation of others, spreading it on the information network, or organizing or instructing personnel to spread it on the information network. The third is "spreading knowing that it is a false fact", that is, the act of spreading on the information network knowing that it is a fabricated fact that damages the reputation of others. If the circumstances are bad, it is regarded as "fabricating facts to slander others". All the above behaviors reflect that travelers have the subjective intention to fabricate facts and slander others, which can be regarded as "fabricating facts and slandering others" for libel. In the era of "self-media", everyone can be an information publisher and disseminator, and everyone should consciously abide by laws and regulations. Information networks are not "extra-legal places". Anyone who fabricates facts at will or maliciously slanders others shall bear corresponding legal responsibilities according to law. Second, Article 2 of the Interpretation clarifies the criteria for incriminating libel through information networks. Because the information network has the characteristics of fast dissemination and the content of online posts is not easy to eradicate, the use of information network to carry out libel will often cause serious practical harmful consequences. Article 2 of the Interpretation clarifies the criteria for incriminating libel by using information network from the aspects of the click volume, page view volume, forwarding volume, actual harmful consequences caused by libel behavior, subjective malignancy of libel behavior, etc. In practice, some criminals fabricate facts that damage the reputation of others and spread them maliciously on the information network. They have tens of thousands of hits in a short period of time, spread quickly and widely, which has a serious impact on the work and life of the victims and even caused serious consequences such as mental disorders of the victims. They should be convicted and punished for libel according to law. Third, Article 3 of the Interpretation clarifies the conditions for applying the public prosecution procedure to the crime of libel through information network. According to the criminal law, libel is a case of private prosecution, except that it "seriously endangers social order and national interests". Article 3 of the Interpretation stipulates that seven situations, such as causing mass incidents, causing public disorder, ethnic and religious conflicts, slandering many people, causing adverse social impact, damaging the national image, seriously endangering national interests, and causing adverse international impact, should be identified as "seriously endangering social order and national interests" and public prosecution procedures can be applied. The public security organ files a case for investigation, and the procuratorial organ files a public prosecution. The application of public prosecution procedure to this kind of libel crime is not only in line with the provisions of criminal law, but also the practical need to effectively punish the use of information networks to commit libel crimes. Judicial organs at all levels should accurately understand and grasp the above situation, not only highlight the key points of the crackdown, punish the crime of libel according to law, but also implement the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity to prevent the expansion of the crackdown. Q: Article 5 of the Interpretation stipulates that whoever fabricates and disseminates false information through information networks and causes serious public disorder shall be convicted and punished for the crime of stirring up trouble. What is the consideration? A: Article 5, paragraph 2, of the Interpretation makes it clear that anyone who fabricates and disseminates false information through the information network to stir up trouble and cause serious public disorder shall be convicted and punished according to the crime of stirring up trouble. At present, some lawless elements fabricate and disseminate false information on the information network, and their information content does not point to specific natural persons, but aims at disturbing social order and endangering public interests. This kind of information posted on the Internet can easily lead to social panic and serious public disorder. Recently, there have been many mass incidents in various places, mostly caused by criminals fabricating false information and spreading it on the information network.

Cyberspace belongs to public space, and network order is also an important part of social public order. With the rapid development of information technology, information network and people's real life have been integrated and inseparable. Maintaining social order is the common responsibility of all netizens. Some lawless elements maliciously fabricate and spread false information through the information network, causing serious social disorder and realistic social harm, and should be investigated for criminal responsibility for the crime of provoking trouble. Q: Article 6 of the Interpretation stipulates that those who publish or delete network information on the information network, threaten or coerce others to ask for public or private property on the grounds of processing network information, or commit the above acts many times shall be convicted and punished for extortion. What are the specific manifestations of this crime? How to correctly define the boundary between crime and non-crime in the process of handling cases by judicial organs? A: Article 6 of the Interpretation clarifies the criteria for determining the crime of extortion by using information networks. Mainly for some lawless elements to post negative information about victims or victims' units on the website, or collect negative information about victims and victims' units on the Internet, in order to help delete posts and "sink to the bottom", take the initiative to contact victims and victims' units and ask victims for property. There are two main forms of this kind of crime, namely "posting" extortion and "deleting posts" extortion. The former threatened to publish negative information and asked the victim to deliver the property, while the latter first spread negative information on the information network and then threatened the victim to deliver the property on the grounds of deleting posts. In essence, this kind of behavior is that the actor threatens and coerces others with the help of information network for the purpose of illegal possession, and the victim delivers property out of fear or under some pressure, which meets the constitutive requirements of extortion and should be convicted and punished for extortion. In judicial practice, we should pay attention to correctly defining the boundary between crime and non-crime from two aspects. First, the actor must take the initiative to threaten, coerce and demand property from the victim and the injured unit. If the actor did not contact the victim to delete the post actively, nor did he threaten or coerce, but used the "advertising fee" when the victim came to the door to ask for deletion,

Collecting the victim's fees in other names such as "sponsorship fee" and "service fee" is not considered as extortion. Secondly, this paper uses the expression of "information" instead of "false information". Even if the perpetrator's threat to publish the negative information of the victim and the injured unit on the information network is true, as long as the perpetrator extorts public or private property for the purpose of illegal possession and on the grounds of publishing or deleting negative information, it still constitutes the crime of extortion. Q: Article 7 of the Interpretation stipulates that those who provide information deletion services through the information network for the purpose of making profits, or provide services such as publishing information through the information network for compensation knowing that it is false information, thus disrupting the market order, shall be convicted and punished for the crime of illegal business operation. What is the main purpose of this regulation? How to correctly identify in judicial practice? A: Article 7 of the Interpretation clarifies the conviction and sentencing standards for the crime of using information networks to carry out illegal business operations. The NPC Standing Committee's Decision on Maintaining Internet Security and the State Council's Measures for the Administration of Internet Information Services clearly stipulate the activities of providing information services to netizens through the Internet. In practice, some so-called "network public relations companies", "marketing companies" and "network promoters" provide paid information deletion services for others on the information network without permission, or provide paid information release services for others through the information network while knowing that it is false information. This kind of behavior violates state regulations, disturbs market order and is harmful to society, so it should be convicted and punished for the crime of illegal business operation. This article clearly stipulates that providing services such as publishing information to others for a fee through the information network constitutes the crime of illegal business operation, and must be based on the premise that the actor knows that the published information is false. If the actor does not know that the published information is false, even if the fee is charged, it is not considered as the crime of illegal business operation. However, for the paid service of deleting information through the information network, the Interpretation does not require the actor to know that the deleted information is false information. At present, the main business of some illegal "online public relations companies" is "deleting posts", and a considerable part of the deleted information is the real information released by the people. The state protects the normal and legal information exchange and service activities of information network users according to law, which is also an important part of the market order of network information services. The actor's paid deletion of the real information of information network users infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of the majority of netizens, and also seriously undermines the market order of network information services, which is in line with the crime of illegal business operation and should be punished according to law.