Movie companies utilizing financing tools for fundraising can contribute to a  healthy and orderly development of the film industry. However, the inherent risks behind unconventional financing activities, such as policy risks, investment return risks, and compliance risks, make it a high-risk endeavour. These risks not only impact the development of the film industry but also have the potential to trigger economic security risks and other repercussions. The normative means of civil judgments for contract disputes mainly rely on determining contract effectiveness, which, compared to administrative supervision, has  limitations. Administrative supervision, on the other hand, faces the  challenges of a  regulatory vacuum and a need for  clear guidelines. Therefore, it is crucial to establish a balanced approach that prioritizes both government regulation and industry development. This involves implementing partical  institutional arrangements, guiding through legislation, government supervision, judicial assistance, and encouraging self-discipline within enterprises. This multi-stakeholder collaborative governance model should be constructed based on  existing legal regulations.

Promoting Chinese-style modernization is an important task in realizing the millennium ambitions of the Chinese nation. The construction of a Chinese national community serves as a potent ideological weapon for consolidating consensus among various ethnic groups, rallying unity, and advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the comprehensive modernization drive. It is an inevitable requirement for the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and a steadfast guarantee for advancing Chinese-style modernization. In the process of promoting Chinese-style modernization, continuous efforts must be made to advance the construction of the Chinese national community, solidifying correct historical, ethnic, national, cultural, and religious perspectives. This entails building a shared spiritual home for Chinese-style modernization, fostering interactions, exchanges, and integration among ethnic groups, enhancing the modernization level of the governance system and capabilities in ethnic affairs, and resolutely guarding against significant risks and hidden dangers in the ethnic domain.

Social e-commerce is an emerging and booming industry, within which direct selling serves as a common marketing model. Owing to unclear legal definitions and standards, weak awareness of corporate compliance, and immature reforms of corporate compliance systems, the direct selling model is susceptible to being misused for pyramid selling activities and criminal behaviors. Compliance for direct selling social e-commerce platforms should therefore not be postponed. The most controversial form of direct selling is multi-level direct selling, which is deemed a typical manifestation of pyramid selling in Chinese law due to its hierarchical structure, the requirement to expanding the subordinates, and team-based remuneration. Multi-level direct selling is, however, essentially a legitimate marketing model, offering advantages such as reduced marketing costs and increased employment. The law needs to be refined to better identify pyramid selling, distinguishing between legitimate direct selling and pyramid selling, and providing guidance for platforms to ensure compliance both pre-incident and post-incident. Platforms themselves must enhance their awareness of compliance, establish compliance manuals that meets their own needs, forbid swindle, and effectively deliver quality products and operations.

Procedural adjudication involves resolving disputes and making decisions about the proper application and adherence to these procedural rules, rather than determining guilt or innocence. In criminal procedural law across various jurisdictions, the exclusionary rule is managed through a distinction between substantive adjudication, which addresses the facts and legal issues of guilt, and procedural adjudication, which focuses on trial processes and evidence handling. Substantive rules define illegal evidence, such as evidence obtained through torture or constitutional violations, to ensure trial integrity and protect defendant rights. Procedural rules detail the steps for challenging evidence admissibility. Globally, these principles are applied in both common law and civil law systems, with a universal recognition of the defendant's right to a fair trial and the prosecution's burden to prove evidence legality. This paper compares the approaches of the U.S., UK, and Germany, highlighting the diversity and convergence in their methods. The U.S. follows a principle-driven approach with strict rules, the UK allows judicial discretion under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), and Germany uses specific statutory provisions with less judicial discretion. The study reflects the broader differences in legal philosophy and procedures between common law and civil law systems, illustrating a universal commitment to justice and human rights through the evolving rules and practices of illegal evidence exclusion in criminal procedural law.

The application of Internet technology has changed the paradigm of defamation behavior. The determination of defamation act should adopt the single act theory, that is, "dissemination" should be the core element, and whether there is a "fabrication" act should not be the decisive determining factor of conviction. The essence of false information in the crime of defamation is its inconsistency with the facts, and its misleading nature makes false information work. And the possibility of infringement on the legal interests of the false information is the basis of punishment. The regulation of defamation acts should balance the relationship between the protection of reputation rights and freedom of expression, and the judgment of defamation acts against public figures should adhere to the principle of actual malice. The special identity attributes of public figures should be taken into account, and relatively loose standards should be adopted for the protection of their reputation rights. At the same time, insufficient protection of the reputation rights of public figures should be avoided. To determine the "serious circumstances" of online defamation, we should adopt the "accumulation to crime" approach, which can effectively solve the problem of using information networks to carry out a large number of low-hazardous behaviors, and the single act is not enough to constitute a crime, while the cumulative consequences or dangers reach the standard for conviction.

Merely implementing campaign-style strict enforcement measures proves inadequate for fundamentally preventing and controlling the proliferation of organized crime in rural areas. Thus, addressing the root causes of such criminal activities becomes a necessary strategy. The genesis of organized crime in rural regions distinctly differs from urban areas, marked by unique political, economic, cultural, and social underpinnings. These root factors not only foster an environment conducive to the growth of organized crime but also weaken the mechanisms of social control in rural areas. Furthermore, they diminish the resistance willingness and capability of the rural population, leading to the breeding of criminal activities. Consequently, effective governance of rural organized crime demands substantial reforms in the political, economic, cultural, and social fabric of rural settings, coupled with an enhancement of the rural populace's political and economic stature at multiple levels.

Presumption is the main approach used in criminal justice practice in China for determining one’s clear knowing, and there are sufficient standards for it in the crimes of intentionally damaging cultural relics, scenic spots and historical sites. The presumptions of one’s clear knowing regarding the crimes of intentionally damaging cultural relics and scenic spots stipulated in Article 324 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China exhibit three structural types: “presumption as the mainstay with inference as a supplement,” “comprehensive presumption as the mainstay with single presumption as a supplement,” and “presumption based on general possibility as the mainstay with presumption based on high probability as a supplement.” Currently, China lacks clear legal rules for presumptions of one’s clear knowing related to the crimes of intentionally damaging cultural relics, scenic spots and historical sites. When relying solely on Article 14 of the Criminal Law to determine one’s clear knowing, it often leads to excessively high standards of determination and unreasonable specific measures. Based on the distinction between "intentionally targeting specific cultural relics, scenic spots, and historical sites" and "knowingly causing damage to cultural relics, scenic spots, or historical sites as a result of one's own actions”, Chinese judicature should improve the basic rules for presumptions of one’s clear knowing related to the crimes of intentionally damaging cultural relics, scenic spots and historical sites. It should establish presumptive empirical rules centered on the rationality of ordinary people and refine the content and methods of presumptive knowing.

The deterrence rationale is a theoretical pillar for the Supreme Court of the United States to establish and apply the exclusionary rule. Its basic logic is to weaken an official’s incentive to illegally obtain evidence by excluding illegally obtained evidence and then to compel the official and his peers to abide by the law in the future law enforcement activities better. The deterrence rationale used to be an important reason for the Court to exclude illegally obtained evidence. However, with the continuous shrinking of the exclusionary rule, both the Court and theoretical cycles deeply rethink the deterrence rationale, and they deem that it is difficult for the exclusionary rule to deter an official’s unlawful activities in practice. It means that it is very necessary to rethink the tendency of relying heavily upon the exclusionary rule on this issue of coping with procedural illegal activities in China because there are serious defects in the deterrence rationale.

The finance is an indispensable part of the quotidian business and daily life, also plays a vital role in the flourish and prosperity of the nation. A stable financial system and a healthy financial market is the prerequisite of the financial innovation and the backbone to become the financial powerhouse, which strengthening the financial competitiveness and enhancing the international financial clout. Simultaneously, science and technology advance by leaps and bounds, the deep integration and coalescence of the financial industry and the internet with other state-of-the-art technologies and devices catalyze the new financial crimes to become the cynosure which draws the prodigious attention and contentious debate around the academics and the professional practitioners. The financial crimes always have the idiosyncrasies that involving a wad of money, inflicting a passel of victims, and wreaking tremendous havoc toward the financial system and is doing an enormous disservice to the social stability and harmony. In recent years, the perpetration which involve the financial means is also increasingly rampant and prevalent, posing great challenge to the innovation and financial regulation. To prevent and defuse the huge financial risk caused by the new financial crime, the response from the criminal law and criminal policies is pivotal and valuable.To combat this kind of sinister crime and safeguard the steady progress of financial market and the tranquility of the society, the priority is to pinpoint the conception and purview of the new financial crime to ensure that the relevant party has an accurate and precise understanding of the features belong to the new financial crime to make sure do not let a single involved get loose or the innocent to fall to the justice. The current penal policies are the tool to learn the contemporary understanding of the new financial crime and how to confront and defeat it, to assist the academics perceive whether or not the nowadays tactic toward this treacherous crime is commensurate to its complexity and severity, or whether or not the strategy we have adopted is compatible to the principles and dicta stipulated by the Criminal law. The judiciary authority can also apply the policies into the judicial praxis and garner the useful feedback or the outcome of the practice to embellish the policies to better tackle the autochthonous and epochal challenge. This article will also delve into the distinct characteristics of the new financial crime, including the crime object, the target of the crime, actus reus, mens rea, et cetera. The meticulous dissection of new financial crime is beneficial for the judiciary practice to have a better identification and implementation of the relevant statutes and rules. Some salient and archetypal quandaries or conundrums have been succinctly and pithily displayed and discussed in this article to look forward finding the loose end of the entangled skein related to the new financial crimes. To form a permanent, stable, effective and reliable financial security in conjunction with the sophisticated and formidable governance of new financial crimes is the best way to spur the momentum of the financial industry, rectify the systematic and inveterate glitches and loopholes, establish a resilient and robust financial system and platform, and simultaneously, to some extent get rid of the miasma spewed from the specter of the new financial crimes.

In recent years, the United States has increasingly emphasized the role of import bans in the execution of its trade policy, strengthening the enforcement of bans on specific products and countries. In this context, it is important to consider the value implications of U.S. import ban measures and whether their widespread implementation has historical continuity. An analysis of the value of U.S. import bans reveals that they reflect mercantilist values and inter-nation competition, aiming to protect domestic industries and related products from foreign competition while imposing trade sanctions on specific rival countries. Furthermore, an examination of the historical implementation of U.S. import bans shows their presence throughout key periods, including the American War of Independence, both World Wars, the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, and the current era of multilateralism. Thus, U.S. import bans, as part of its longstanding trade policy, continue to persist, and their expansion in the current context is merely a repetition of history. The measures themselves will not disappear entirely, regardless of future changes in U.S. trade policy.