Too Bad I Take Things Seriously

But that does not mean that illegal acts go unpunished. Similar actions are, according to regulations, subject to administrative detention for one to fifteen days. However, in the actual enforcement process, although regulations specify a minimum of one day for administrative detention, in practice, it is generally from five to fifteen days. Detention isn't in a regular jail but in a public security detention center. By comparison, the treatment and environment are much better.

It's time to prepare to file charges under other offenses.

Taking a deep breath, Qin Mu returned to the nursing home and began gathering evidence concerning Xia Qingqing's act of releasing the video. The video's content violated his rights to personal privacy and reputation, among others. This was not merely an illegal infringement; the act itself constituted a crime.

First, the widespread distribution of the video constituted the crime of infringing on citizens' personal information. In criminal law, the crime of infringing on citizens' personal information refers to the act of stealing or otherwise illegally obtaining personal information. This information is typically acquired by state agencies or units in sectors like finance, telecommunications, transportation, education, and medical care while performing their duties or providing services. The crime involves selling this information or illegally providing it to others, particularly in severe circumstances. Strictly speaking, this offense targets agencies, organizations, or individuals who traffic in personal information. For severe cases, sentencing includes fixed-term imprisonment of up to three years or criminal detention, possibly with an additional fine. Particularly severe cases can result in three to seven years of fixed-term imprisonment and a fine.

However, judicial interpretations have broadened this definition and added a catch-all clause. Exposing someone's privacy online, if it leads to serious consequences, can result in criminal liability for infringing on citizens' personal information.

In modern society, the sale of citizens' personal information remains rampant. One's mobile number can be leaked almost immediately after logging onto a website. Even on online marketplaces, personal identity information is blatantly sold, with data packages costing as little as 60 yuan. This data can include names, birthplaces, educational backgrounds, schools of graduation, marital status, residences, delivery addresses, and mobile numbers. It is openly priced and sold with utter brazenness.

Generally speaking, those who buy this information are either intermediaries or scam gangs. Intermediaries do so to find potential clients and facilitate transactions. Scam gangs do so to find potential victims for targeted, precision scams. Due to the low cost of obtaining personal information and the hassle involved in pursuing such cases, these phenomena have never ceased.

Xia Qingqing, by publicizing the identity information of the four individuals in the video, caused its wide distribution. This has already led to serious consequences and thus constitutes the crime of infringing on citizens' personal information. According to judicial interpretations, individuals who sell or disseminate others' identity information generally face fixed-term imprisonment of up to three years or criminal detention.

Secondly, while the video's content was based on facts, it involved the widespread dissemination of a court's judgment. This was aimed at countering the verdict and influencing public opinion. Such actions also violated the "Public Security Administration Punishment Law," constituting malicious incitement of public opinion, exploitation of netizens, and deliberate disruption of public order online. These offenses warrant administrative penalties. This means a fine plus administrative detention for five to fifteen days.

Indeed, criminal law does not include a specific charge for inciting public opinion. Only actions like instigating online conflicts and certain fan culture behaviors can be administratively punished. In contrast, criminal penalties are often too severe for such acts, while administrative penalties are too light. This disparity is why instances of problematic fan culture, instigation of online conflicts, and incitement of negative sentiment are so prevalent.

Finally, beyond the two points mentioned, the video's widespread circulation across various platforms also constituted the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble. This is also a rather obscure charge. Many people are aware of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble, but most believe it applies only to violent incidents like brawls and fights. That is not the case.

In criminal law, the definition of this crime is very special. It initially evolved from the crime of hooliganism. The criminal charge of hooliganism itself has since been abolished. Decades ago, however, the crime of hooliganism was dreaded. Hooliganism specifically referred to openly scorning national laws and social morals, assembling crowds for brawls, picking quarrels and provoking trouble, insulting women, disrupting public order, and other acts of severe misconduct. In other words, any act that violated social morals and was condemned by society was considered hooliganism. For example, publicly harassing a girl on the street could lead to her suing for hooliganism. The penalties for hooliganism were increased multiple times, with the maximum sentence being the death penalty.

Decades ago, there were cases where individuals engaged in promiscuous sexual relations were prosecuted for hooliganism, sentenced to death, and immediately executed by firing squad. Now, however, people engaging in promiscuous behavior or harassing women are commonplace. Decades ago, such individuals would have been invariably arrested and executed by firing squad.

The main reason for abolishing this statute involved numerous considerations, one of which was the severity of its sentencing. Sentencing someone to twenty years' imprisonment merely for verbal harassment would undermine the utilitarian deterrent value of criminal law. Criminal law aims to deter the emergence of criminal acts, not to mete out cruel punishment to criminals.

Therefore, in subsequent judicial practice, this broad offense was broken down into several specific crimes. These include forcibly molesting or insulting women, molesting children, engaging in group licentiousness, participating in mass brawls, and picking quarrels and provoking trouble, among others.