标签： 南京品茶群

　　In recent years, more and more families keep pets. Due to the characteristics of pet dogs, it is necessary to go out for a walk, which leads to more and more disputes over compensation for animal tort damage. What kind of responsibilities do pet owners have to bear for pet injuries in different situations? How to deal with some special situations of "pets don’t hurt people, but people are hurt by pets"? Below, we will analyze and interpret these related legal issues.

　　1. There are many situations in which pets hurt people, for example, they are not leashed, and pet dogs are prohibited. What responsibilities should pet owners bear respectively?

　　Case 1:

　　On the afternoon of September 12th, grandma took her grandson to play in the artificial lake in Gardening Mountain, Mianyang, Sichuan. Suddenly, a dog broke free from the leash and rushed over 10 meters away. Before grandma could pick up her grandson, the dog threw the child to the ground and began to bite. The woman holding the dog rushed to deal with it at the first time, but the dog never let go until the child’s grandfather arrived and pried the dog’s mouth open with a steel pipe.

　　According to family members, the biting dog is a Rottweiler, which belongs to a fierce dog. The woman holding the dog belongs to a pet shop, and the dog owner then rushed to the hospital, expressing his full cooperation with the treatment. At present, the police are investigating and handling it.

　　Media reporters found that in May, 2022, there were 29 kinds (categories) of prohibited dog directories in Mianyang Key Management Areas (Draft for Comment), and Rottweilers were among them.

　　On June 15, 2022, the Regulations on Dog Breeding Management in Mianyang City passed the examination and approval of the 35th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 13th Provincial People’s Congress, and will be officially implemented on December 1, 2022.

　　Lawyer’s law popularization:

　　The principle of no-fault liability is generally applied in the Civil Code in cases where pets injure human beings. If it can be proved that the damage was caused by the intentional or gross negligence of the infringed, the liability may not be assumed or mitigated.

　　At this time, how to determine the responsibility should be considered from the subjective fault of the breeder and whether the dogs are in compliance with local mandatory regulations. Articles 1246 and 1247 of the Civil Code have made different provisions on animal wounding and dangerous animal wounding, respectively. For the definition of dangerous animals, Article 1247 only stipulates "dogs that are forbidden to be kept", and it is still necessary to determine which dogs are prohibited to be kept through specific local management regulations.

　　The Rottweiler involved in this case belongs to the local dog-keeping ban, but this provision has not been implemented at the time of the case, so it cannot be applied to determine the tort liability, but this does not mean that the breeder can escape the tort liability. In Article 1246 of the Civil Code, the breeder is required to take safety measures for raising animals. The safety measures required here should be considered in combination with the size of the dog, the possibility of injury and other aspects.

　　In this case, it can be seen that compared with small dogs, large dogs are more difficult to control when injuries occur, and simple leashes are not enough to avoid the possibility of injuries, so breeders should have higher duty of care. Simple leashes can no longer prevent dogs from hurting people, and more comprehensive ways should be adopted, such as putting a condom on the dog’s mouth. Therefore, in this case, the leashing behavior of breeders cannot be considered as that they have taken safety measures and should bear tort liability.

　　Case 2:

　　At 19 o’clock on September 15, Wang was walking on the road and was hit by a big dog that suddenly jumped out. Immediately, Wang was sent to the hospital for treatment. The diagnosis was a fracture of the sacrum and multiple injuries.

　　At the time of the incident, the local police station received 110 instructions and arrived at the scene to find out that the big dog was raised by He, and at the time of the incident, He’s dog was not on the leash. Wang sued He and demanded compensation for medical expenses, lost time and nutrition expenses totaling more than 30,000 yuan.

　　The court held that Wang was injured by a pet dog raised by He, and He, as the keeper and manager of the pet dog, should bear tort liability according to law.

　　After investigation, He has paid more than 10,000 yuan for the medical expenses advocated by Wang, and has no objection to the transportation expenses, follow-up treatment fees and spiritual comfort funds advocated by Wang. As determined by the court, He should compensate Wang for all losses including lost time and nutrition expenses totaling 16,940 yuan.

　　Lawyer’s law popularization:

　　Article 1246 of the Civil Code stipulates that if no safety measures are taken to raise animals and cause damage to others, only when there is evidence that the damage was intentionally caused by the infringer can the infringer’s responsibility be reduced.

　　In this case, Wang did not have any intention or negligence, and He did not take safety measures such as leashing the dog, which is actually very dangerous. This situation is completely in line with the situation that Article 1246 of the Civil Code did not take safety measures. He should bear tort liability for all the losses caused by Wang.

　　2. If the owner has fulfilled his obligations such as tying the rope and closing the door and window, but there is still an accidental injury, how should he be held accountable?

　　Case 1:

　　Recently, a video of an old man who died after tripping over a dog rope was circulated on the Internet.

　　It is reported that one night, Luo Mou, a girl from Luoshui Village, Shunde, Foshan City, Guangdong Province, took another villager’s dog out to play. When passing through Luoshui Market, the dog broke free from the restraint rope and accidentally tripped over the 88-year-old villager Mai, causing Mai to be injured and died after being sent to the hospital for rescue. According to the local town government, this incident was initially judged to be an accident.

　　Lawyer’s law popularization:

　　For pet injury cases, the fundamental thing is to judge whether the breeder has fulfilled his management obligations. In this case, the injury case caused by the girl taking out the dog kept by others actually belongs to the tort caused by the fault of the third person. At this time, the breeder has fulfilled the management obligation, and the reason for the injury of the infringed person is that the girl took the pet without consent, not that the breeder subjectively failed to fulfill the management obligation. At this time, the infringed person can claim from the third person or the breeder when pursuing the responsibility. If he claims from the breeder, the breeder can still claim compensation from the third person.

　　In terms of ultimate responsibility, although the girl who caused the damage is a person with limited capacity for civil conduct in civil affairs, her guardian should also be liable for compensation.

　　Case 2:

　　An old man walked his dog by the roadside in the morning, but unfortunately he was hit by a cat falling from upstairs and fell into a coma. According to reports, at present, the elderly are discharged from the hospital after more than 20 days of treatment, and their families and cat owners are negotiating compensation.

　　Lawyer analysis:

　　In this case, when the cat falls from the upstairs, we need to look specifically at the cause of the cat’s fall. If there is no man-made parabolic reason, only the cat escapes or accidentally falls, and the keeper has taken safety measures such as sealing the window, then the general principle of the Civil Code for the infringement of keeping animals, that is, the principle of no fault, can be applied. If the infringed person has no intention or gross negligence, the keeper still needs to bear certain tort liability.

　　3. How to deal with "the pet didn’t hurt people, but people were injured by pets"?

　　Case 1:

　　Recently, when riding a battery car through a section near Chen Mou’s home, Zhang was bitten by a dog from Chen Mou, which led to Zhang’s fall and hospitalization. Zhang then filed a lawsuit in court.

　　The court held that because the animals themselves are dangerous, they may cause others to be frightened and have psychological fear and thus induce damage. Therefore, as long as the animals raised cause damage to others, they can constitute the responsibility of keeping animals for damage, and it is not necessarily a prerequisite for keeping animals to bite or scratch others. Defendant Chen Mou, as an animal breeder, chased and bit Zhang by his dog, causing him to fall and get injured. In the case that the defendant had no evidence to prove that Zhang had intentional or gross negligence, the court refused to accept the defendant’s defense opinion, and the defendant Chen Mou assumed all the compensation responsibilities for the plaintiff.

　　Lawyer’s law popularization:

　　In the Civil Code, the principle of tort liability for damage caused by raising animals is no-fault liability. Compared with general tort, this principle has stricter management obligations for infringers. When this principle is applied, it is not mainly based on the fault of the actor, but on the objective existence of the damage result, and the tort liability is determined according to the causal relationship between the danger of the things managed by the actor and the damage result.

　　Because there is a certain danger in raising animals, even if the pet doesn’t hurt people, if there is a causal relationship between the damage result of others and the pet, then the breeder needs to bear the tort liability. However, although this provision is to better safeguard the rights and interests of the infringed, it still considers the fault of the infringed. In the case of intentional or gross negligence of the infringed, the breeder can reduce or even exempt the liability.

　　Case 2:

　　A few days ago, the topic of "a man kicking a dog in Chongqing caused the old man to fall" attracted attention. The video shows that an old man tried to separate the big dog from the puppy in a fight, when the owner of the puppy rushed to kick the big dog, causing the old man holding the big dog to fall to the ground.

　　In this incident, the reason why the puppy struggled with the big dog was that the dog owner let the puppy run around without a leash. In the end, the man involved promised to apologize and provide necessary compensation.

　　Lawyer’s law popularization:

　　The leash for raising animals has been expressly stipulated in various places now, and it has already belonged to the situation stipulated in Article 1246 of the Civil Code without leash. At this time, although the old man’s fall was not directly caused by the dog’s injury, it still had a causal relationship with the dog’s failure to leash, so the man involved should still be liable for compensation. At this time, if there are specific local management rules and regulations on pet leash, the man involved may be subject to administrative punishment.

　　Text/An Xiaoxue (lawyer of Beijing Jingpeng Law Firm)

　　The new subsidy policy for new energy vehicles has appropriately raised the threshold of technical indicators, focused on supporting high-quality products with excellent energy consumption and high technical level, and encouraged enterprises to pay attention to safety and consistency.

　　At the same time, the implementation of the New Deal has also accelerated the "reshuffle" of the industry. Low-end enterprises that rely on subsidies for survival are doomed to be eliminated. Only by accelerating innovation drive and improving product strength can new energy vehicle companies hedge the impact of subsidies.

　　The much-anticipated financial subsidy policy for new energy vehicles has finally been introduced. On the 26th, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Science and Technology and the Development and Reform Commission jointly issued the Notice on Further Improving the Financial Subsidy Policy for the Promotion and Application of New Energy Vehicles, which clarified the subsidy standards and liquidation methods for new energy vehicles in 2019. Compared with the previous subsidy policy, what specific changes will the New Deal have, what impact will it bring to the industry, and how should enterprises respond?

　　Pure electric vehicle compensation is reduced by nearly half

　　In 2019, the New Deal proposed that the driving range of pure electric passenger cars should not be less than 250 kilometers, that of plug-in hybrid passenger cars (including extended range) should not be less than 50 kilometers, and that the subsidized driving range should only be divided into "two grades" of 250 to 400 kilometers and more than 400 kilometers, with subsidy amounts of 18,000 yuan and 25,000 yuan respectively, and that of plug-in hybrid passenger cars (including extended range) should be 10,000 yuan.

　　Last year, except for vehicles below 150km, subsidies for pure electric vehicles were divided into "four gears" with cruising range of 150-200km, 200-250km, 250-300km and 300-400km and above, with subsidies of 15,000 yuan, 24,000 yuan, 34,000 yuan and 45,000 yuan respectively. Plug-in hybrid passenger cars (including increase)

　　"Compared with the previous year, the subsidy for pure electric passenger cars has been reduced by nearly half." Cui Dongshu, Secretary-General of the National Passenger Car Association, said that unlike previous years, when the energy density threshold of the power battery system of new energy vehicles was greatly raised, this policy appropriately raised the threshold of technical indicators according to the principles of advanced technology, reliable quality and guaranteed safety, and kept the upper limit of technical indicators basically unchanged, focusing on supporting high-quality products with excellent energy consumption and high technical level, while encouraging enterprises to pay attention to safety and consistency.

　　Pre-allocation of subsidy funds in time

　　In view of the problem of untimely payment of subsidy funds, the New Deal proposes to improve the liquidation system and improve the efficiency of funds. It is required that from 2019, some funds will be pre-allocated after the vehicles with operating mileage requirements are sold and licensed. After meeting the mileage requirements, they can apply for liquidation according to procedures. After the release of the policy, vehicles with operating mileage requirements will not be subsidized if they run less than 20,000 kilometers within 2 years from the date of registration, and the pre-allocated funds will be deducted at the time of liquidation.

　　It is understood that subsidies for new energy vehicles are divided into central financial subsidies and local financial subsidies. After enterprises submit application documents and materials, the central financial subsidies need to be approved and tested by the National Development and Reform Commission, the Finance Committee, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the Ministry of Finance; Local financial subsidies involve many cities, and the declaration process is also different. Some enterprises report that compared with central financial subsidies, local financial subsidies have many application links and long processes, and the progress of distribution is more difficult to determine.

　　"If there is no cash flow and financing is difficult, it will affect the bank’s guarantee and mortgage. The superposition of layers will increase the investment cost of car companies and bring some pressure to the operation of upstream batteries and other enterprises." Cui Dongshu said that new energy vehicle enterprises themselves need cash flow, and this subsidy policy clarifies the rules for timely payment of subsidy funds, so that enterprises can research and develop and promote the market with peace of mind, thus achieving sustainable development.

　　Local financial withdrawal subsidy

　　The new policy also clearly states that local governments should improve their policies. After the transition period, they will no longer give purchase subsidies to new energy vehicles (except new energy buses and fuel cell vehicles), and instead use them to support the "short board" construction of charging (hydrogenation) infrastructure and supporting operational services. If the local government continues to grant purchase subsidies, the central government will deduct the relevant financial subsidies accordingly.

　　"This means that local finance will withdraw its subsidies to vehicle manufacturers, and the policy based on financial subsidies will shift more to the non-financial system, focusing on optimizing the development environment of new energy vehicles, including road rights, charging facilities, power battery recycling, commercial insurance, used cars and so on. At the same time, it also helps to reduce local protectionism. " Cui Dongshu said that China’s policy of encouraging the development of new energy vehicles is a systematic policy, aiming at realizing the joint support system of national and local new energy vehicle policies, ensuring that after the subsidy is completely withdrawn in 2021, new energy vehicle products still have certain advantages over the policy environment of traditional fuel vehicles, and promoting the establishment of a market-oriented independent new energy vehicle selection system.

　　In addition, the transitional policy also allows car companies to have a reasonable layout and time period for calibrating new products.

　　The influence of the New Deal has different reactions.

　　"The intensity of this slope retreat is expected, and the impact on enterprises is not too great." Zhao Changjiang, general manager of BYD Auto Sales Co., Ltd. said that only by accelerating innovation drive and enhancing product strength can enterprises better hedge the impact of subsidy retreat.

　　However, many people in the industry said that with the increase of subsidies, many uncertainties have been added to the original high-speed development of new energy vehicles. Chen Hong, chairman of SAIC, bluntly said that without subsidies, China’s new energy vehicle market would decline significantly.

　　"After the subsidy for new energy vehicles has declined, car companies can ‘ Complement ’ 。” Jia Xinguang, executive director of china automobile dealers association, pointed out that the power battery occupies a very important position in the manufacturing cost of new energy vehicles. If the battery cost can be reduced through technological innovation, the impact of subsidy retreat on the market will be weakened.

　　"It is not necessarily a good thing for a powerful enterprise. Subsidies should be seen dialectically." Gu Huinan, general manager of GAC New Energy, told reporters that with the gradual withdrawal of financial subsidies, the reshuffle of new energy vehicles is coming, and those low-end enterprises that rely on subsidies for survival are doomed to be eliminated. What can stand out must be the outstanding enterprises that actively face the market and can provide products with market competitiveness.

　　□ Our reporter Han Dandong

　　□ Intern Guan Chuyu of this newspaper

　　"Just playing a game, why do you want me to open so many permissions? ！” Mr. Li from Quanzhou, Fujian recently played a small game called ×× Bottle, and found that this game actually requires the player to authorize the phone address book, location, access to photo albums, text messages and storage to play. "This is simply more detailed than checking the account."

　　Mr. Li is not the only one who over-requests permission for online games. A number of gamers recently said in an interview with the reporter of the Rule of Law Daily that many online games, especially small games, have the problem of asking for excessive permissions. For example, if you play a small game, you have to authorize your camera, microphone, positioning and address book. If you don’t agree, you can’t play the game.

　　"Playing a game, privacy is stripped away." A player said.

　　Why do players have to open so many permissions to play a game? What impact may excessive permission have on players? Why has this chaos been repeatedly banned? With these questions, the reporter launched an investigation.

　　Online games ask for permission excessively.

　　Illegal collection of personal information

　　"Some large online games don’t need to open so many permissions. Instead, some casual games require opening various permissions. Moreover, once the storage permission is obtained, various advertisements will pop up soon, and some will be automatically downloaded to ‘ My file management ’ . The game didn’t have fun, and the garbage had to be cleaned up. " Mr. Li complained rather helplessly.

　　The reporter’s investigation found that some games will clearly explain the role of opening various permissions when applying for access rights. For example, in the privacy permission setting of the next popular hero competitive mobile game, there are explanatory information on the right side of each permission: you can experience game functions such as voice, voice to text, etc. by opening the microphone permission; Open the location permission to experience the game functions such as glory war zone and nearby people.

　　However, some installation-free applet games have a large number of requests for content rights unrelated to the game, and there is no relevant explanation. In the "Play Small Games in XX seconds" App, there are many small games that can be played without installation and opening. The reporter tried to play more than a dozen of them. Almost all of these games require a number of permissions from the player’s mobile phone, and they cannot enter the game without consent.

　　The privacy policy of a small program game named "XX Model" reads: "When you use this software network service, this software automatically receives and records the information on your mobile phone, including but not limited to your health data, voice used, date and time of visit, software and hardware feature information and the webpage you need."

　　It is understood that this is a cosmetic game. The privacy policy of this game does not indicate what the purpose of obtaining these rights information is, and "health data" has nothing to do with the game experience itself. There are many similar Applet games in the above-mentioned app, and there is this one in the privacy policy.

　　The reporter noticed that there are some boutique games in the App that are free of installation, but if you want to play these games, you must allow the App to access the applications on the player’s device, including photos, audio and video, and files, otherwise you will not be able to enter the game.

　　In fact, it is very common for online games to ask for permission excessively. In the list of apps that infringe on users’ rights and interests notified by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology in recent years, game software has been listed many times, and the problems involved in the software can hardly be avoided in two categories: "App is forced, frequent and excessively asks for permission" and "illegally collects personal information".

　　On March 21 this year, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology reported the latest batch of 55 apps that infringe on users’ rights and interests, including 7 game products. The main problems are excessive permission and illegal information collection.

　　In January this year, the Hainan Provincial Network Information Office conducted technical tests on various applications with a large number of users and closely related to people’s lives, in view of the illegal acquisition, out-of-range collection and over-requesting permission of apps strongly reflected by the masses. The results showed that all 17 online game apps of stick figure with a Line Drawing had behaviors such as forcing users’ permission, not specifying the purpose of requesting permission and over-collecting personal privacy information to varying degrees.

　　On March 27th, Chongqing Communications Administration and Sichuan Communications Administration notified the list of Apps infringing on users’ rights and interests in Sichuan and Chongqing in the third phase of 2023. A game App "illegally collects personal information, illegally uses personal information, is forced by the App, frequently and excessively asks for permission, and the app frequently starts itself and is associated with it", which became one of the typical cases that were notified.

　　The principle of minimization should be followed.

　　Obtain the necessary permissions to run.

　　How to measure whether a game excessively asks for permission?

　　Xie Lianjie, a lawyer of Beijing Yingke (Shanghai) Law Firm, believes that it can be considered from four aspects: the type, scope, quantity and purpose of authority. For example, if the game software reads contacts and short messages in the address book, the permissions are beyond the scope of its functional requirements, or reads permissions unrelated to the game, or the number of requested permissions is too large, and the requested permissions are inconsistent with the purpose of using its functions, etc., which are all excessive requests for permissions.

　　"To measure whether the game software excessively requests permission, we need to comprehensively consider various factors, but there is a principle that must be followed, that is, the principle of minimizing permission. The game software should only request necessary permission and cannot abuse it." Xie Lianjie said.

　　Xie Lianjie said that excessive access may have a series of adverse effects on users. For example, game software requires users to authorize information such as address book and location. Once users are authorized, personal privacy may be leaked; Excessive request for permission may also lead to system security risks, and malicious software can use the obtained permission to attack and tamper, bringing security risks to users; There are also some applications that must be recharged to use certain functions, and careless authorization by users may lead to unnecessary expenses.

　　What legal provisions are suspected of violating the game’s excessive request for permission?

　　Yao Jinju, a professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, said that over-requesting permission is not necessary for providing services or unreasonable application scenarios, especially when it is silent or running in the background, and it is suspected of violating the relevant provisions of the Personal Information Protection Law, the Network Security Law and the Data Security Law. At the same time, if this behavior causes the personal dignity of natural persons to be violated or the personal and property safety to be endangered, it will violate the provisions of the Civil Code on personal rights and property rights.

　　"By asking for permission, the game software may directly obtain the identified or identifiable personal information, and collect, store, use, process, transmit, disclose and delete it. The Personal Information Protection Law stipulates that the processing of personal information should have a clear and reasonable purpose, and should be directly related to the purpose of processing, and adopt a method that has the least impact on personal rights and interests. " Yao Jinju said that the collection of personal information should be limited to the minimum range of processing purposes and should not be over-collected. Therefore, game software should obtain the necessary permissions to maintain the normal operation of the game strictly and limited based on clear and reasonable purposes.

　　Establish and improve the supervision system

　　Special rectification and strengthening punishment

　　The regulatory authorities have repeatedly stressed that it is forbidden to ask for excessive rights and constantly expose illegal game software. Why is this problem still banned?

　　In the view of Zhu Jie, a lawyer of Taihetai (Chongqing) Law Firm, there are three main reasons for repeated violations:

　　Rich profits bring great temptation. The acquisition of user rights is essentially to obtain user’s personal information. These personal information, whether processed by game operators themselves or provided directly to others, can be transformed into huge benefits.

　　The punishment for violations is not strong and the deterrence is insufficient. For such violations, the punishment measures of the regulatory authorities mainly include rectification within a time limit, removal from the shelves, administrative punishment, etc. These measures are not enough to offset the profits brought by violations.

　　Regular rectification of regulatory measures, the coverage is not large enough and the duration is not long enough, which makes some illegal manufacturers feel lucky or take temporary rectification to cope with supervision.

　　"The reason why game operators ask for permission excessively is to collect a large amount of personal information and dig deep into users’ consumption habits in order to seek more benefits. For game software and its operators who repeatedly violate regulations or cause serious consequences and adverse effects due to excessive permission, they should be directly punished. " Zhu Jie said that only by bringing the long-term mechanism into the supervision system and strengthening the punishment measures can the illegal manufacturers be banned.

　　"The problem now is not that the punishment prescribed by law is not enough, but that the corresponding law enforcement punishment has not been fully kept up." Xie Lianjie suggested that the special rectification of personal information protection in the game industry should be launched.

　　Some players suggested that the punishment for game operators who ask for too much authority should be strengthened, not only the illegal game software should be rectified and removed from the shelves, but also the game operators should be punished accordingly, and those who refuse to change their education should be restricted from putting their products on the shelves in the future; To further compact the platform’s responsibility, the platform should focus on the supervision of illegal game software, and smooth the reporting channels to respond to the demands of the masses.

　　Si Binbin, a lawyer of Beijing Tao ‘an Law Firm, also proposed to further implement the responsibility of the platform or application store. Game software on the shelves of regular application stores generally needs to access its SDK (Software Development Toolkit), which can be set to a strict form by default by the platform, and it is not allowed to be modified at will. If it is really necessary to ask for more user rights for the game software to run, it needs to be verified and confirmed by the game developer and the platform. "If there is a problem, the regulatory authorities can consider double penalties for game operators and platforms to promote the dual implementation of responsibilities."

　　Many experts suggested that users should also enhance their awareness of security, protect their personal information, choose a regular platform to download game software, try not to download from browsers or game stores with unknown sources, read the Privacy Agreement and User Agreement in detail, and do not authorize it easily; Find the problem of asking for permission excessively, actively report it and jointly safeguard the online game environment.