Rumors such as being investigated by the FBI have always been a big shadow on Sun Yuchens public image. The person involved and his related industries have paid a huge price in public opinion. However, what is true cannot be false, and what is false cannot be true. Now, with the support of the Peoples Court, Sun Yuchen has completely shaken off the shadow of these rumors.
Recently, Beijing Sina Internet Information Services Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Sina.com) officially issued a public apology statement, admitting that the false reports it published about TRON founder Justin Sun constituted an infringement of Suns reputation rights. This apology statement means that Sina.com has accepted the first-instance judgment of the Beijing Internet Court on Sun Yuchens case against Sina.com for infringement of his reputation rights, marking the end of the six-year lawsuit with Sun Yuchens victory. This is also the second time that Sun Yuchen has won a personal reputation infringement case in the past year. It is worth noting that the above two cases revolved around the medias false reports about him.
Rule of law as a yardstick: authoritative media must also respect facts
According to the civil judgment of the Beijing Internet Court on the case, from 2019 to 2022, Sina.com published articles titled Video | Sun Yuchen: The most flirtatious post-90s kid in history is playing crazy with post-90s old men!, Sun Yuchen is suspected of insider trading, FBI and IRS have launched an investigation and similar series of articles, as well as related special content on its financial channel. The articles, especially the titles, have obvious negative comments, which makes it easy for the public to lower their social evaluation of Sun Yuchen himself. At the same time, the reports also claim that Sun Yuchen is suspected of improper trading and other false information. This series of reports has not been fully verified and is exaggerated with extremely serious accusations, which has aroused widespread social attention and public discussion.
The verdict also pointed out that some reports cited articles from foreign media The Verge, and many of the allegations in the article were not confirmed. The Verges report cited unnamed sources and mentioned multiple false matters, but failed to provide official evidence or confirmation. These contents were further reprinted and disseminated by Sina.com without factual basis, causing serious damage to Sun Yuchens reputation.
Faced with the false reports, Sun Yuchen immediately refuted them through social media, clearly stating that the relevant reports were false information, and had hired a lawyer to pursue the legal responsibility of the publisher. However, Sina.com continued to spread the false information without proper verification, further damaging Sun Yuchens reputation. In response, Sun Yuchen decided to protect his legal rights through legal means.
After six years of legal proceedings, the Beijing Internet Court finally ruled that Sina.com failed to fulfill its review obligations and published seriously inaccurate content, which constituted an infringement on Sun Yuchens reputation. The court required Sina.com to delete the relevant reports, apologize to Sun Yuchen publicly in newspapers and on its official website, and pay compensation.
This verdict strongly proves that in a society ruled by law, judicial justice will not be biased because the defendant is an authoritative media. The courts strict review of evidence and precise grasp of the boundary between freedom of speech and the right to reputation demonstrate the judicial principle of facts as the basis and law as the criterion.
The victory in this case is not only a successful defense of Sun Yuchens personal reputation rights, but also provides valuable experience for public figures on how to protect their rights and interests through legal means when encountering false reports. Experts said that when reporting on public figures and events, the media must strictly verify the source of information and avoid one-sided dissemination of unverified content, so as not to hurt innocent people and bear corresponding legal responsibilities.
It is worth noting that in June 2024, Justin Sun also won another lawsuit. In this case involving the reputation rights dispute of Chongqing Business Media Group, the Peoples Court of Yubei District, Chongqing City determined that the media published false content about Justin Sun, causing damage to his reputation, and required Chongqing Business Media Group to publicly apologize and compensate for related expenses. The court emphasized that the media should fulfill the necessary verification obligations when reporting on public figures to ensure the authenticity of the content.
Breaking stereotypes: Justin Sun’s “victory breakthrough”
For a long time, Justin Sun has been labeled as scammer and hype for some behaviors and views in the field of cryptocurrency that have been interpreted differently. In this ruling, the court determined that some Sina articles used expressions such as fraud, money laundering and FBI investigation without sufficient factual basis, and did not report Sun Yuchens public rumor-busting in a balanced manner, which ultimately constituted defamation.
For Justin Sun, this victory is not only a victory in the legal aspect, but also an important turning point in his public image. The verdict mentioned that Justin Sun actively presented evidence in the lawsuit, clarified through social media many times, and entrusted lawyers to defend his rights, and finally cleared the false accusations through legal means. The courts support allowed him to raise his head from long-term negative public opinion, and also set an example for blockchain industry practitioners to defend their rights according to law.
The verdict in this case reveals the drawbacks of labeled cognition in the public opinion field. In the past, Justin Sun was often portrayed as a cryptocurrency speculator by the media, but the court determined that some of the accusations were not substantiated and were even fabricated and distorted. For example, the verdict pointed out that the so-called FBI investigation and other content were actually cited from unverified information and were seriously unbalanced with Justin Suns public response.
This result reminds the public that in an era of mixed information, the evaluation of any individual should be based on facts rather than rumors. After the verdict, Justin Sun said that he would continue to focus on the compliance of blockchain technology. His efforts in recent years to promote dialogue between the industry and regulators may deserve more objective scrutiny.
Sun Yuchens victory in the case is a protection of individual rights by the rule of law, and also a warning to the medias responsibility. It proves that the right to reputation is equally protected by law for both public figures and ordinary citizens. At the same time, this case also provides an opportunity for society to reflect - only by abandoning preconceived prejudices and basing ourselves on facts and the law can we build a more rational and fair public opinion environment.
Justin Sun’s “counterattack” and “breakthrough” may have just begun, and the next episode will be even more exciting.
