新闻中心分类
律师张冰质疑经纪人金畅无证还挣浙江上千万,后者回应:满嘴胡言(张冰律师质疑经纪人金畅无资质在浙获利逾千万元,金畅回应:纯属胡说)发布日期:2026-01-16

Examining agent regulations in China

se

I’m considering how to address the user's request about unlicensed agents under Chinese law. They might want a summary, timeline, legal context, or implications. In China, "经纪人无证" refers to unlicensed agents, and qualifications used to be required for entertainment agents. The State Administration of Radio, Film and Television previously had a certification, which has since changed. I need to ensure I accurately represent the ongoing developments around occupational licensing and regulations without making incorrect assertions.Clarifying performance agency regulations

I need to explain that there are regulations under the Ministry of Culture and Tourism about performance agencies and brokers. Unlicensed individuals may face penalties for commercial activities without proper qualifications, which can vary by time and region. It’s vital to provide a generic legal framing regarding defamation risk and the burden of proof. I should ask the user what specific information they want, and I could offer to draft a balanced summary if they share a link.Responding in Chinese and providing options

Since the user wrote in Chinese, I'll need to respond accordingly. I can summarize the situation briefly: "网传... 律师张冰发文质疑经纪人金畅存在无证执业且在浙江赚取上千万元; 金畅回应称纯属造谣。事件仍在拉扯,暂无权威结论." I should clarify that I can't verify the specifics. Then I'll offer several options for what they might want next:

  1. 需要时间线/要点速览
  2. 想看双方核心观点与证据对比
  3. 想了解涉及的法律点(演出经纪人资质、虚假宣传、名誉权)
  4. 需要我帮你查证公开信息并附来源
  5. 写一段不侵权的媒体稿/朋友圈客观表述

I'll include a caution about not making definitive assertions and reference typical legal considerations like evidence and burden of proof.

看起来是一起舆论争议:有消息称律师张冰质疑经纪人金畅“无证还在浙江赚上千万元”,而金畅回应称“满嘴胡言/造谣”。目前属于各说各话阶段,尚无权威结论或司法认定。

你想怎么推进?我可以:

  1. 做一版要点速览/时间线(基于你提供的链接或材料)
  2. 对比双方已公开的说法与可见证据,标注存疑点
  3. 讲解相关法律要点:演出/经纪人资质监管、无证从业的合规风险、名誉权与侵权认定(证据、举证责任、可能后果)
  4. 帮你检索公开报道与工商/裁判文书等信息并给出来源
  5. 起草一段中性表述的说明或媒体通稿,规避侵权与定性

提示与风险控制:

  • 未有权威结论前,避免使用“违法/诈骗/造假”等定性用语,可用“质疑/称/据其说法”等表述。
  • 如需判断“无证”,需明确是何种资质、何时何地的监管口径与适用法规,并核对主体身份信息。
  • 若涉及名誉权,关键在事实依据、公共利益相关性、注意义务与合理评论边界。

需要我先从哪一项开始?如果要做梳理,请发链接或截图。