[People's Livelihood Economic Viewpoint] The "swallow's nest" "overturned" in the live broadcast room, should "refund one compensation three" or "refund one compensation ten"?
Reading tips
Recently, the "problematic bird's nest incident" has been exposed in the field of live delivery. The anchor team has given the current compensation plan, but the division of responsibilities and the basis for compensation standards still need to be further clarified.
Experts said that many departments have issued guidance on live broadcast delivery of goods, but there is more chaos in the industry, and the handling of this incident will become a touchstone for the implementation of relevant regulations.
Recently, the well-known delivery anchor team Simba team fell into a "problematic bird's nest incident", which continued to arouse public attention.
After the problem was fermented for many days, the anchor team put forward a first compensation plan, "recall all the "Mingzhi" brand bird's nest products sold in the Xinxuan live broadcast room, and assume the responsibility of returning one compensation and three compensations" to solve the problem first.
But Wang Hai, a professional faker, said that he should "refund one and pay ten."
Since the beginning of this year, e-commerce live broadcasts have flourished.
However, while live broadcast sales data continue to rise, the frequency of live broadcasts carrying goods "turnovers" is also increasing. Problems such as false propaganda of live broadcasts, inability to guarantee product quality, and difficulty in returning and replacing goods have become increasingly prominent.
How to determine the responsibility after the “carriage rollover” of live-streamed goods, and what is the legal standard for compensation?
In this regard, a reporter from the Workers’ Daily interviewed relevant experts.
"Sugar water" is sold as bird's nest, at least "refunds one for three"
A few days ago, professional counterfeit Wang Hai said on Weibo that Simba’s apprentice "Shida Beautiful" sold a "Mingzhi" brand "Small Golden Bowl Bird's Nest Instant Bird's Nest with Rock Sugar" in the Xinxuan live broadcast room.
The test report of the bird's nest published by him showed that the sucrose content of the product was 4.8%, and the carbohydrate in the ingredient list was 5%, confirming that the product was sugar water.
Subsequently, Xin Youzhi (ie, Simba), the founder of Guangdong Xinxuan Holding Company, responded publicly on his personal Weibo saying that after testing, this "Mingzhi" brand bird's nest product was indeed exaggerated when it was promoted in the live broadcast room. The ingredients of bird's nest With less than 2 grams per bowl, this product "is actually a bird's nest flavored drink and should not be promoted as a bird's nest product".
At the same time, Simba said that Xin Xuan now proposes an advance compensation plan, "recalling all'Mingzhi' brand bird's nest products sold in Xin Xuan's live broadcast room, and assumes the responsibility of returning one compensation and three compensations." First refund 61983040 yuan), solve the problem first.
Why is "refund one compensation three"?
Liu Junhai, a professor at the School of Law of Renmin University of China, told reporters that according to Article 55 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, if a business operator commits fraud in providing goods or services, he should increase compensation for the losses suffered in accordance with the requirements of consumers. , The increase in compensation is three times the price of the consumer's purchase of goods or the cost of receiving services, that is, "refund one and compensate three."
"In this problematic bird's nest incident, Simba also admitted that the'bird's nest' promoted by his team had an exaggerated publicity problem. Therefore, this matter must be subject to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law, and at least a'refund of one compensation for three' is required." Chen Yinjiang, deputy secretary general of the Consumer Protection Law Research Association of the Chinese Law Society said.
"Return one and lose three" who will pay? Who decides the "refund and compensation"?
According to Simba’s response, the "Brand Promotion Cooperation Agreement" signed between Xin Xuan and Guangzhou Rongyu Company (namely the brand owner of "Ming Zhi" Bird's Nest) clearly stipulates that the brand must guarantee to provide product descriptions for "Shida Beautiful" display and sales , Introduction, pictures and other information materials are not false, do not infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of any third party, and comply with relevant laws, regulations, policies, etc. of the country of production and sales, otherwise all responsibilities and losses incurred will be borne by the brand.
"We coordinate with the brand in accordance with the contract provisions, and hope that the brand will compensate all users in accordance with the "Consumer Rights Protection Law" on false publicity related laws and regulations." Simba said, "But because the brand has always avoided meeting, communication is not possible. Positive, the plan is not clear, so I decided to proactively respond to and resolve this incident."
Some netizens praised Simba's attitude to face the problem and take responsibility.
However, Wang Hai stated that “0.014 grams of sialic acid was artificially added” in the “Bird’s Nest” product, and he needed to “refund one for ten”.
Where does "return one pay ten" come from?
According to media reports, the ingredients of "Ming Zhi" bowl flavored instant bird's nest products contain calcium lactate, and the product category is flavored beverages.
However, according to the standards for the use of food additives issued by the National Health and Family Planning Commission, calcium lactate is not suitable for "flavored beverages."
According to Article 148 of the Food Safety Law, consumers who produce food that does not meet food safety standards or operate foods that do not meet food safety standards can, in addition to claiming compensation for losses, also claim from the producers or operators The person demanded to pay ten times the price or three times the loss.
Wang Hai believes that the flavored beverage is a food that does not meet the food safety standards, and consumers can request a "refund of one for ten".
However, some lawyers said that the premise of "refunding one compensation ten" is to affect personal safety, which requires identification by relevant departments. If the "bird's nest" is identified as a food that does not meet safety standards, consumers can request a "refund." One loses ten".
Live streaming is full of chaos, and offenders must pay
"This problematic bird's nest incident has aroused widespread public concern. What is behind it is the many chaos of live broadcast delivery. Although many departments have recently introduced new regulations to regulate the development of the live broadcast delivery industry, the current false publicity and product quality of live broadcast delivery Problems such as inability to guarantee and difficulty in guaranteeing returns and exchanges have not been significantly changed." Chen Yinjiang said.
In Chen Yinjiang's view, the handling of this incident is the touchstone of whether the relevant regulations can be implemented.
If the problem is solved well, it will not only provide reference for relevant departments to deal with similar issues in the future, but also have a deterrent effect on related live broadcast marketing operators. It can make webcast operators fully understand that there is no regulatory gap in webcasting, as long as the relevant laws are violated Regulations and damage to consumer rights must be paid for.
“Specifically, it is necessary to clarify the division of responsibilities of all parties involved in the Xin Bird’s Nest incident. For example, what responsibilities does the Simba team have to bear? What responsibilities does the live broadcast platform bear? What responsibilities does the bird’s nest manufacturer bear? Consumers follow the "Consumer Rights Protection The law requires a “refund of one compensation for three” or a “refund for compensation of ten” in accordance with the “Food Safety Law”? Can the relevant infringers be included in the credit blacklist? These issues need to be determined based on specific investigations.” Chen Yinjiang Say.
In addition, Liu Junhai believes that the Simba team and brand owners may also face administrative responsibilities.
According to the provisions of Article 56 of the "Consumer Rights Protection Law," those who make false or misleading publicity about goods or services shall, in addition to bear the corresponding civil liability, other relevant laws and regulations impose penalties on the authorities and methods of punishment. Where it is specified, it shall be implemented in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations; if it is not provided for by laws and regulations, the administrative department for industry and commerce or other relevant administrative departments shall order corrections, and may issue warnings, confiscate illegal gains, or impose illegal gains on the basis of the circumstances. If there is no illegal income, a fine of not less than 500,000 yuan shall be imposed. If the circumstances are serious, business shall be suspended for rectification and the business license shall be revoked.
Yang Zhaokui