For example, in the (2017) Hu 0110 Min Chu Case No. 5113, the court held that although the "Contract for the Joint Production of the 30-episode TV Series

Recently, a personal insurance contract dispute case we represented was tried by the People's Court of Chaoyang District, Beijing, and the Beijing Financial Court. The case was finally settled through mediation. Although the case is concluded, the legal issues involved in the case are still worth considering.

As the most important natural resource, land transaction at the national level has strict legal regulations and market supervision. As far as the right to use construction land is concerned, it can only be transferred according to law if certain conditions are met. Whether it is the Constitution, the Land Management Law, or other laws, or administrative regulations such as the Provisional Regulations on the Assignment and Transfer of the Right to Use Urban State-owned Land, it is prohibited to buy, sell, or illegally transfer land in other forms. The establishment of the crime of illegally transferring or reselling land use rights in Article 228 of the Criminal Law is the most severe punishment for illegal transfer of land. In practice, there is a very common phenomenon that company shareholders implement equity transfer with land use rights as the content. So, under the current legal system in China, can this situation be recognized as the crime of illegally transferring or reselling land use rights in criminal law?

Network infringement generally includes infringement of personality rights, property interests, and intellectual property rights. In recent years, there are more and more common violations of personality rights, which are known as "cyber violence". "Cyber violence" also includes infringing on others' reputation, privacy, or impairing their personal rights. This article will tell you, "network violence" caused by infringement, who should bear the responsibility?

不可否认的一个现实是，近几年来“网络暴力”越来越普遍了。不断发生的“网络暴力”事件造成了诸如受害人自杀的严重后果，引发了大家的广泛关注。“网络暴力”是一个复杂的社会问题，涉及到方方面面。作为法律人，这其中涉及的法律问题需要我们关注与研究。那么，我国目前司法实践中针对“网络暴力”的处理是何现状，可能是我们首先需要了解的。通过案例无疑是窥一斑而知全豹的有效途径。为此，笔者在中国裁判文书网上分别以“网

China is currently experiencing a very rapid development of information networks, which has greatly promoted the development of the new economy and the convenience of social public life, but at the same time, it has also spawned new cyberspace chaos, with frequent occurrences of malignant cyber violence. Cyber violence is different from traditional crime in that it exhibits new types and characteristics of behavior. For the criminal legal regulation of cyber violence, there is already sufficient necessity and legitimacy. Although the current criminal legal system in China can evaluate and combat online violence to a certain extent, there are obvious problems such as insufficient regulatory scope and insufficient regulatory force, which are difficult to adapt to the current situation of effective governance of illegal crimes and need to be optimized and improved.

近年来，互联网给人们提供了自由开放的交流平台，使得不同的观点、思想都可以在网上进行交流，而随着网络社交媒体日益发达，网络言论的表达渠道更加畅通、传播交流更加便捷，极大地提升了社会公众的文化、娱乐生活水平。但不可否认，因互联网社交媒体言论引发的名誉侵权纠纷也随之增多。部分网民有不同意见就出言相讥、为发泄情绪而言论偏激、为个人利益而假借舆论监督发表煽动性言论，演变成网络暴力进而时不时地刺痛人们的神经

Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) is a form of corporate property rights that emerged in the 1950s in the United States and has been widely implemented in the past 20 years. It belongs to a special compensation plan, which refers to a benefit sharing mechanism and a participation mechanism that allows employees to enjoy residual claims through holding stocks in order to attract, retain, and motivate company employees. An employee stock ownership plan is essentially a benefit plan that is applicable to all employees of the company. The company allocates shares of the company based on factors such as salary grade or working years.

No, you need to go through change registration to have a change in property rights. The following precedents are helpful for analysis, Supreme People's Court (2021) No. 2847: "After review, our court believes that the house in question was purchased during the marriage between Huang Aiju and Chen Yuguang, and was originally their joint property. Although the divorce agreement between Chen Yuguang and Huang Aiju stipulates that the house in question belongs to Huang Aiju, the divorce agreement is only an internal agreement between the two parties, and does not have the legal effect of directly causing changes in the property rights of the house." (2021) No. 7090 of the Supreme Law and People's Republic of China: "The divorce agreement signed by Deng Lihong and Li Ge states that the house involved in the case belongs to Li Jingyuan. Although the agreement on the house involved in the divorce agreement does not directly have the legal effect of changing the property rights, the house involved in the case is the common property of the husband and wife during the marriage relationship between Deng Lihong and Li Geyuan. When the marriage relationship is dissolved, both parties agree that the house involved in the case belongs to their son Li JingyuanIt has a life support function. "Li Jingyuan has the right to request that the ownership change of the house involved be registered in his name." Both support this view, but the opposite party has the right to request that the ownership change of the house be registered in its name.