Xiaomi said that the defendant committed several acts of infringement. Among the infringments were videos concerning a “flame retardant test” released by Chongqing Tianji Meike Technology Co., Ltd. on the back shell of a Xiaomi 4A TV and Honor Smart Screen × 1, which provoked negative feedback from Weibo users. The blogger also published content suggesting that the Xiaomi 10 Supreme Commemorative Edition was performing poorly.
Xiaomi claims that the blogger, who is a well-known digital professional in the industry, has been posting negative comments about the company on his Weibo account for a long time. The blogger has been directly posting content unfavorable to the company and his comments have prompted many Weibo users to follow on. The blogger’s actions have not fulfilled the relevant duty of care, and his biased public comments possess subjective malice and could be misleading to other unspecified web viewers. As a result, Xiaomi claims that the company has incurred losses in its daily business activities, reputation, and the overall social evaluation of its brand.
The blogger argued that he had no intention nor negligence in infringing on Xiaomi’s reputation, pointing out that some content had been directly forwarded without modification.
The court held that the content published by the blogger did not have subjective negligence and did not constitute an infringement on the reputational right of Xiaomi. But the blogger should objectively display different views when posting in the future. The verdict was to reject Xiaomi’s claim. The case acceptance fee is 13,800 yuan, which shall be borne by Xiaomi.