On March 2, the Supreme People's Court issued the provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the application of law in the trial of online consumption dispute cases (I). The judicial interpretation used four provisions to stipulate the responsibilities of the live broadcast marketing platform, including the self-supporting responsibility of the live broadcast marketing platform, the advance responsibility when the operator of the live broadcast room is unable to provide real information Joint and several liability for failing to fulfill the obligation of food business qualification examination and joint and several liability when knowing or should know the illegal act. False propaganda Operators in the platform shall be liable for compensation Zheng Xuelin, President of the first civil division of the Supreme People's court, said that in recent years, the webcast e-commerce industry has developed rapidly. How to guide the healthy development of new business forms and protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers is indeed a new topic facing judicial practice. The judicial interpretation has made provisions on commercial webcast marketing. Article 11 stipulates that the operators in the platform shall be liable for compensation for the false publicity made by the staff of the operators in the platform. Article 12 stipulates the responsibilities of the operator of the live broadcasting room. In view of the problem that consumers cannot clearly identify the actual sales subject in webcast marketing in practice, this article makes it clear that the operator of the webcast room should be able to prove that it has indicated that it is not a seller and indicated the actual seller, and it should be sufficient to enable consumers to identify. Otherwise, consumers have the right to claim that the operator of the webcast room should bear the responsibility of commodity sellers. If the operator of the live broadcasting room has fulfilled the obligation of indication, the people's court shall recognize it by considering the factors such as the appearance of the transaction, the agreement between the operator and the operator, the cooperation mode with the operator, the transaction process and consumer cognition, and leave room for case discretion and future development through more flexible provisions. Liu Min, vice president of the first people's court, said that as a new model of digital economy, webcast e-commerce has indeed developed rapidly in recent years. During the formulation of judicial interpretation, we also paid full attention to the issue of webcast and made more detailed provisions. Operators in the platform set up a webcast room to sell goods, which is usually called brand self broadcasting in practice. In this case, only the way of displaying and selling goods has changed, and the responsibility is not fundamentally different from that of ordinary operators. The judicial interpretation makes it clear that if the staff of the operators in the platform cause damage to consumers due to false publicity in the webcast, consumers have the right to claim that the operators in the platform bear the liability for compensation. In addition to the case of brand self broadcasting, it is more common in practice that subjects other than businesses set up live broadcasting rooms to specialize in live broadcasting marketing business. In this case, consumers often have the problem of unclear identification of the actual sellers. In response to this problem, the judicial interpretation stipulates that the operator of the live broadcasting room should be able to prove that it has indicated that it is not a seller and that it is an actual seller, and it should be sufficient to enable consumers to distinguish. Otherwise, consumers have the right to claim that the operator of the live broadcasting room should bear the responsibility of the commodity seller. If the operator of the live broadcasting room has fulfilled the obligation of marking, it is not that he does not assume the responsibility of the seller. In this case, the court shall determine the legal relationship and how to bear the responsibility based on the facts such as the appearance of the transaction, the agreement between the operator and the operator in the live studio, the cooperation mode with the operator, the transaction process and the subjective cognition of consumers. The live broadcast format is diverse and developing continuously. There is no one size fits all provision in the judicial interpretation. While safeguarding consumers' right to know and choice, it guides the standardized and healthy development of new formats, and leaves room for case discretion and future development through more flexible provisions. After the platform operator assumes the responsibility Have the right to recover from the operator of the live studio Liu Min also said that the online live broadcast marketing platform plays an important role in the whole live broadcast marketing market. In practice, sometimes it is difficult for consumers to find the live studio operator. According to relevant administrative regulations, the live broadcast marketing platform has the obligation to authenticate the real identity information of the live broadcast room operator. In order to protect consumers more fully, the judicial interpretation stipulates that if the sale of goods in the live broadcasting room damages the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, and the operator of the live broadcasting marketing platform cannot provide the real name, name, address and effective contact information of the operator of the live broadcasting room, consumers can request compensation from the operator of the live broadcasting marketing platform according to law. After the live broadcast marketing platform operator assumes the responsibility, it has the right to recover from the live broadcast room operator. In addition, the judicial interpretation paid special attention to the sale of food through webcast. We have noticed that it is common to sell promotional foods in webcast rooms, including prepackaged food and bulk food, as well as some food made by family workshops. According to the provisions of the food safety law, if the online food operator should obtain a license according to law, the platform provider should review its license. If the operators of the live broadcast marketing platform can not control the qualification of food operators, the risk of consumers facing potential food safety hazards will be greatly increased. The judicial interpretation stipulates that if the operator of the webcast marketing platform fails to fulfill the statutory obligation to review the food business qualification of the webcast room, which damages the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, it shall bear joint and several liability with the operator of the webcast room. Of course, the object of audit is the live broadcasting room that needs to obtain the food business license according to law. Liu Min said. E-commerce operators shall not use the reason that the goods have been unpacked Refuse to return goods for 7 days without reason The reporter of Beijing Youth Daily noted that the "Regulations" improved the seven day no reason return system and strengthened the protection of consumers' after-sales rights and interests. This is usually impossible for consumers to do on-site shopping in shopping malls. Therefore, the law on the protection of consumers' rights and interests has set up a seven day return system without reason. The provisions further clarify that consumers should unpack and inspect the goods due to the necessity of inspecting the goods without affecting the integrity of the goods. E-commerce operators shall not claim that the seven day unreasonable return system is not applicable on the grounds that the goods have been unpacked. At the same time, it is clear that, unless otherwise stipulated by law. At the same time, the regulations clarify that the contracts for false orders, reviews and traffic are invalid, and cut off the chain of "black and gray products" in the online consumer market. Zheng Xuelin, President of the first people's Court of the Supreme People's court, said that the rapid development of the online consumer market has also been accompanied by some unhealthy and non-standard problems, such as the emergence of "black and gray products" such as special applications and operation teams that brush orders, reviews and traffic, deliberately creating false records, infringing on consumers' right to know and choice, and disrupting the market order. "The judicial interpretation makes it clear that the contracts signed by e-commerce operators and others for false publicity by means of fictitious transactions, fictitious clicks and fabricated user evaluations shall be deemed invalid by the people's court according to law and guide the market subjects to standardize their operation." It is reported that the regulations also clarify the legal consequences of damage caused by prizes, gifts and exchange of goods, and standardize online promotion. Article 8 of the judicial interpretation stipulates that if the prizes and gifts provided by e-commerce operators in promotional activities or the commodities exchanged by consumers cause damage to consumers, e-commerce operators shall be liable for compensation, and shall not claim exemption on the grounds that the prizes and gifts are provided free of charge or the commodities are exchanged. (reporter Wen Jing, Meng yaxu and Yu Meiying) (outlook new era)