论文部分内容阅读
A man surnamed Li was sentenced to fi ve years and nine months in prison for placing fake orders online to improve retailers’ rankings by a court in Yuhang of east China’s Zhejiang Province in June. In early 2014， e-commerce giant Alibaba Group became suspicious of an online retailer after analyzing big data. In May that year， the case was reported to local police in Hangzhou， provincial capital of Zhejiang. After an initial investigation， Li emerged as a key suspect in the case. Between February 2013 and June 2014， he had received a total of 800，000 yuan （$120，000） from online sellers for placing fake orders. A further probe revealed that Li used social media to contact online sellers offering to raise their online profi les if they signed up to his scheme. This was the fi rst case of someone being held criminally accountable for placing fake orders online to boost retailers’ rankings.
Online retailers pay people to place “orders” with their online shops， then post empty express parcels to these “buyers.” When every“purchase” is completed， the “buyers” write good comments and receive payment from retailers. Although fake buyers may be paid only a few yuan per transaction， given the huge number of online retailers， they can make a lot of money every day.
Most potential consumers tend to turn to other consumers’ comments and also online retailers’ profi les for reference. Good comments and high rankings play a very important role in persuading them to make a purchase in an online shop. This is not a problem by itself. However， when the good comments and high rankings of a shop are fake， it’s dangerous for consumers.
These tricks put consumers at risk， as they may well buy things of low quality. In the long run， this fraudulent behavior is also detrimental to online retailers themselves and even the overall online retailing business. When consumers are all attracted to shops that have high rankings， really good shops will lose consumers and may have to shut down， and even honest shops will also become objects of suspicion.
The industrial chain of making fake orders has been there for many years， and keeps growing due to the light punishment. In the past， the highest fi ne for placing fake orders was only 200，000 yuan （$30，000）， and such cases were not criminalized. Many people believe the criminal punishment given to Li will serve as an effective deterrent to those who are involved in the business， both fake buyers and online retailers， and is thus of special significance in cleaning the online retailing business environment and protecting consumers’ interests. Some suggest that the most important thing is to not let anyone committing such fraud escape from punishment. Gao Lu （Qianjiang Evening News）： People tend to refer to other consumers’ comments when they visit online shops. To some extent， the credibility of online sellers is closely related to consumers’ comments and shops’ rankings. If fake data push the shops’ rankings high， potential consumers will be severely misled.
An online shop depending on fake orders doesn’t offer quality products to consumers as its development is not the result of market competition， but is based on false information and fake stories. Consumers’ interests are very likely to be damaged when they visit such shops.
Worse still， these shops will squeeze out honest shops that sell good products but still fall behind in the rankings. Gradually， when consumers have had enough of poor quality products， the reputation of the whole online shopping business will go down.
Online shopping is thriving because it is based on a credibility mechanism which connects consumers to sellers who don’t know each other. Honesty and the spirit of contract is not only the foundation of online shopping， but also the cornerstone of any society.
Online shops earn good comments from consumers who are satisfi ed with the products. If they wish to complain about the quality， there is also a channel for them to submit their complaints. To some extent， the online economy is an economy for honest people.
Online shops that achieve their high rankings based on fake orders are making money at the expense of the whole online shopping business.
To curb such tricks， not only should online shopping platforms and operators assume their social responsibility， the supervisory authorities and the whole of society should also take their share of responsibility.
Tangjiweide （pinglun.eastday.com）： Rampant cheating in the online shopping business poses a deadly threat to this industry， which is based on credibility. This is partly because of the light punishment. Even if the crooks are punished， the punishment is nothing compared with the profi ts they’ve made through tricking consumers. For example， in April 2016， together with relevant authorities， the Alibaba Group discovered nine gangs and 279 online shops involved in this dark business. Their revenue totaled 400 million yuan （$59 million）， but according to regulations， the most severe punishment is a fi ne of only 200，000 yuan.
If fake rankings continue to be tolerated， with little punishment， reports of cheating will also continue. The biggest problem lies in the inadequacy of current laws， which are unable to hold the organizers and participants in the fake ranking business accountable. Actually， it’s possible to use current laws more effectively to deal with issues like fake orders. This time， a person has been punished for committing the crime of “illegal business operation，” in the absence of a more fi tting new law. This case will undoubtedly deal a heavy blow to this prevalent illegal online industry.
Yang Peng （Huashang Daily）： Fake orders and false rankings have seriously disrupted online shopping markets and the credit mechanism of online retailing. Conservative estimates put the number of participants in this business at 100，000.
To some extent， the existence of fake rankings makes online shopping risky for consumers. No matter how potential consumers try to distinguish between real and fake rankings and how much online shopping platforms do to stop fake orders， it’s not enough to root out this deceitful behavior.
In the recent criminal case， at fi rst， Li’s legal representative argued that the defendant’s behavior might have contravened some administrative regulations but was not serious enough to be subject to criminal punishment. However， the court rejected this argument. The prospect of being jailed for placing fake orders will be more effective than any other punishment at the current stage.
Wang Lin （Nanfang Metropolis Daily）： Some people applauded the criminalizing of placing fake orders， while others believe Li was jailed due to bad luck. This case alone is not suffi cient to deter the whole “fake orders and fake rankings” industry.
Actually， fake orders have long existed in the online retailing business， and the damage is obvious， yet this has continued. The punishment is a fi ne of 10，000 yuan （$1，500） to 200，000 yuan. Many people thus blame the rampant fake ranking business on light punishment. However， the major reason is not the law’s leniency， but the rarity of its implementation. Such a lenient attitude toward fake orders will hardly deter the whole industry. Too much attention is paid to the severity of punishment， while the importance of holding every culprit accountable is neglected.
The first criminal case against fake orders and fake rankings means the punishment has escalated. In the past， placing fake orders was not targeted mainly because it was diffi cult to detect. Now thanks to technological progress， fake orders can be easily detected on online retailing platforms. The authorities should not always wait for complaints or reports. They should take proactive action by keeping an eye on fake order data and investigating in a timely manner to stop criminals from placing fake orders.
Online retailers pay people to place “orders” with their online shops， then post empty express parcels to these “buyers.” When every“purchase” is completed， the “buyers” write good comments and receive payment from retailers. Although fake buyers may be paid only a few yuan per transaction， given the huge number of online retailers， they can make a lot of money every day.
Most potential consumers tend to turn to other consumers’ comments and also online retailers’ profi les for reference. Good comments and high rankings play a very important role in persuading them to make a purchase in an online shop. This is not a problem by itself. However， when the good comments and high rankings of a shop are fake， it’s dangerous for consumers.
These tricks put consumers at risk， as they may well buy things of low quality. In the long run， this fraudulent behavior is also detrimental to online retailers themselves and even the overall online retailing business. When consumers are all attracted to shops that have high rankings， really good shops will lose consumers and may have to shut down， and even honest shops will also become objects of suspicion.
The industrial chain of making fake orders has been there for many years， and keeps growing due to the light punishment. In the past， the highest fi ne for placing fake orders was only 200，000 yuan （$30，000）， and such cases were not criminalized. Many people believe the criminal punishment given to Li will serve as an effective deterrent to those who are involved in the business， both fake buyers and online retailers， and is thus of special significance in cleaning the online retailing business environment and protecting consumers’ interests. Some suggest that the most important thing is to not let anyone committing such fraud escape from punishment. Gao Lu （Qianjiang Evening News）： People tend to refer to other consumers’ comments when they visit online shops. To some extent， the credibility of online sellers is closely related to consumers’ comments and shops’ rankings. If fake data push the shops’ rankings high， potential consumers will be severely misled.
An online shop depending on fake orders doesn’t offer quality products to consumers as its development is not the result of market competition， but is based on false information and fake stories. Consumers’ interests are very likely to be damaged when they visit such shops.
Worse still， these shops will squeeze out honest shops that sell good products but still fall behind in the rankings. Gradually， when consumers have had enough of poor quality products， the reputation of the whole online shopping business will go down.
Online shopping is thriving because it is based on a credibility mechanism which connects consumers to sellers who don’t know each other. Honesty and the spirit of contract is not only the foundation of online shopping， but also the cornerstone of any society.
Online shops earn good comments from consumers who are satisfi ed with the products. If they wish to complain about the quality， there is also a channel for them to submit their complaints. To some extent， the online economy is an economy for honest people.
Online shops that achieve their high rankings based on fake orders are making money at the expense of the whole online shopping business.
To curb such tricks， not only should online shopping platforms and operators assume their social responsibility， the supervisory authorities and the whole of society should also take their share of responsibility.
Tangjiweide （pinglun.eastday.com）： Rampant cheating in the online shopping business poses a deadly threat to this industry， which is based on credibility. This is partly because of the light punishment. Even if the crooks are punished， the punishment is nothing compared with the profi ts they’ve made through tricking consumers. For example， in April 2016， together with relevant authorities， the Alibaba Group discovered nine gangs and 279 online shops involved in this dark business. Their revenue totaled 400 million yuan （$59 million）， but according to regulations， the most severe punishment is a fi ne of only 200，000 yuan.
If fake rankings continue to be tolerated， with little punishment， reports of cheating will also continue. The biggest problem lies in the inadequacy of current laws， which are unable to hold the organizers and participants in the fake ranking business accountable. Actually， it’s possible to use current laws more effectively to deal with issues like fake orders. This time， a person has been punished for committing the crime of “illegal business operation，” in the absence of a more fi tting new law. This case will undoubtedly deal a heavy blow to this prevalent illegal online industry.
Yang Peng （Huashang Daily）： Fake orders and false rankings have seriously disrupted online shopping markets and the credit mechanism of online retailing. Conservative estimates put the number of participants in this business at 100，000.
To some extent， the existence of fake rankings makes online shopping risky for consumers. No matter how potential consumers try to distinguish between real and fake rankings and how much online shopping platforms do to stop fake orders， it’s not enough to root out this deceitful behavior.
In the recent criminal case， at fi rst， Li’s legal representative argued that the defendant’s behavior might have contravened some administrative regulations but was not serious enough to be subject to criminal punishment. However， the court rejected this argument. The prospect of being jailed for placing fake orders will be more effective than any other punishment at the current stage.
Wang Lin （Nanfang Metropolis Daily）： Some people applauded the criminalizing of placing fake orders， while others believe Li was jailed due to bad luck. This case alone is not suffi cient to deter the whole “fake orders and fake rankings” industry.
Actually， fake orders have long existed in the online retailing business， and the damage is obvious， yet this has continued. The punishment is a fi ne of 10，000 yuan （$1，500） to 200，000 yuan. Many people thus blame the rampant fake ranking business on light punishment. However， the major reason is not the law’s leniency， but the rarity of its implementation. Such a lenient attitude toward fake orders will hardly deter the whole industry. Too much attention is paid to the severity of punishment， while the importance of holding every culprit accountable is neglected.
The first criminal case against fake orders and fake rankings means the punishment has escalated. In the past， placing fake orders was not targeted mainly because it was diffi cult to detect. Now thanks to technological progress， fake orders can be easily detected on online retailing platforms. The authorities should not always wait for complaints or reports. They should take proactive action by keeping an eye on fake order data and investigating in a timely manner to stop criminals from placing fake orders.