 |
| Bai Jingting Says Enough’s Enough – Takes Legal Action After Online Defamation Saga (Tianyancha/Weibo) |
Looks like Bai Jingting has had it up to here with online nonsense – and he's not letting it slide.
Recently, the Beijing Internet Court ruled in favour of the actor in a defamation case involving a Bilibili user (identified only as Fang).
According to court documents dug up via Tianyancha, Fang had been posting insults and twisted “analyses” of Bai using their Bilibili account, accusing him of everything from causing stage accidents to elbowing his way into the spotlight.
 |
| Court Rules in Favour of Bai Jingting After Online Smear Campaign |
Tianyancha Court Announcement Details
Publication Date: 6 May 2025
Page: G41
Case Numbers: (2024) Jing 0491 Min Chu No. 11987, (2025) Jing 0491 Zhi No. 619
Plaintiff: Bai (surname only)
Defendant: Fang (surname only)
Case Role: Plaintiff vs Defendant
Announcement Type: Enforcement Documents, Auction
Court: Beijing Internet Court
Court Announcement Content:
In the network infringement liability dispute between plaintiff Bai and defendant Fang, this court issued Civil Judgment (2024) Jing 0491 Min Chu No. 11987.
Based on the full evidence in the case, the court found that the defendant used their Bilibili account to publicly post insulting and false statements such as “jealousy...” about the plaintiff. The defendant failed to provide any evidence proving that such claims were based on objective facts and did not maintain necessary objectivity and rationality while exercising their right to freedom of expression online.
These statements, once made public, caused the general audience to form a negative perception of the plaintiff’s character, resulting in a decline in their social reputation. Therefore, the court determined that the defendant’s videos on Bilibili infringed upon the plaintiff’s right to reputation and should bear the corresponding legal responsibility.
In the video titled “[Title Redacted]”, the defendant also used technical methods to edit the plaintiff’s image, distorting it into a clown caricature. This act infringed on the plaintiff’s right to portrait and further added to the infringement.
The judgement is as follows:
-
Within seven days of the ruling taking effect, the defendant Fang must delete all infringing content posted via their Bilibili account “Yujang Who Loves to Rant” (UID: [Redacted]).
-
Within the same period, the defendant must publicly apologise to the plaintiff Bai by pinning an apology statement on the homepage of the same Bilibili account, and keep it visible for at least 72 hours. The content of the apology must be reviewed and approved by the court. If the defendant fails to comply on time, the court will publish the main judgement on the People’s Court Announcement Network at the defendant’s expense.
-
The defendant must pay the plaintiff Bai 15,000 yuan in compensation for emotional damages and 5,000 yuan for legal fees within seven days of the ruling taking effect.
-
All other claims made by the plaintiff Bai are dismissed.
As the defendant Fang did not fulfil the court-ordered apology, the plaintiff Bai has applied for compulsory enforcement (Case No. (2025) Jing 0491 Zhi No. 619). This announcement serves to publish the main content of the above judgement.
**
It all started during Lunar New Year 2024, when accounts like Fang’s and another user surnamed Li kept pushing conspiracy-style content under nicknames like “Occupy Spring Hill” and “Spring Hill Studies.”
They tried to frame Bai as someone who schemed for attention during performances – breaking down videos frame by frame to spin a pretty nasty tale.
Bai’s legal team quickly stepped in with a statement, calling the claims outright fabrications. They weren’t just annoyed – they were ready to go to court.
And court they did.
The judge found the posts damaging to Bai Jingting’s reputation and ruled that Fang must delete all the offending content within seven days of the ruling, make a public apology, and pay up – 15,000 yuan for emotional distress and another 5,000 yuan to cover Bai’s legal fees.
Here’s the kicker: even after losing the case, Fang still didn’t apologise.
So Bai Jingting applied for a compulsory enforcement – meaning the courts are now stepping in to make sure Fang does what the ruling says.
Moral of the story?
Internet drama’s fun and games until you land in court. Bai Jingting’s not playing – and neither is the law.