论文部分内容阅读
【裁判要旨】本案是访谈类电视节目引起的名誉权纠纷。名誉侵权责任适用侵权责任的一般构成要件,其中名誉权的客体是权利人的社会评价,不包括本人的名誉感,对行为人的过错判断应以一般理性人的客观标准为宜。作为宪法权力的表达自由既包括对政治性内容的表达,也包括对非政治性内容的表达。现代社会中人们有表达的意愿,也有听取他人表达的意愿。对于电视访谈类节目涉及他人私人信息公开的,不宜轻易认定侵害他人名誉权或隐私权。当名誉权(或隐私权)与表达权发生冲突时,应妥善配置各种权利之间的界限,实现个人权利和社会效益之间的平衡与协调。
The purpose of the referee This case is a dispute over the right to reputation caused by interviews with television programs. Reputation infringement liability applies to the general constitutional elements of tort liability, of which the object of reputation right is the social evaluation of rights holders, excluding my own sense of honor, judgments of the perpetrator’s fault should be based on the objective criteria of the average rational person. Freedom of expression as a constitutional power includes both the expression of political content and the expression of non-political content. In modern society, people have the will to express, and others have the will to listen to others. For television interview programs involving the disclosure of personal information of others, it should not be easily identified as infringing the reputation or privacy of others. When the right of reputation (or privacy) conflicts with the right of expression, the boundaries between various rights should be properly configured so as to achieve the balance and coordination between individual rights and social benefits.