论媒体侵权责任的抗辩事由

发布时间：2018-10-08 20:23

【摘要】：随着我国改革开放的持续推进,思想进一步解放,人们表达意见与监督权力的意识增强,于是媒体这个社会中间机构越来越受到人们的青睐。媒体作为连接政治国家与市民社会的纽带,起着监督立法、司法与行政权的作用,因此也被西方社会称之为“第四权力”。然而,权利无限放大的媒体也在悄然侵害着人们的权利,尤其是侵害人们的人格权。随着当今网络、手机等新媒体和自媒体的发展,人们的表达意愿进一步增强,媒体侵害人格权变得司空见惯,甚至防不胜防。表达自由与人格权的冲突已经成为切实需要解决的问题。如何解决表达自由与人格权的冲突,比较一致的看法是构建一套健全的媒体侵权责任的抗辩事由体系。然而,在立法方面我国还未制定一部《媒体法》来规范媒体的行为,有关抗辩事由的司法解释也存在立法技术粗糙,事实与意见不分,公正评论的范围狭窄,适用条件模糊,操作性差等一系列问题;在司法实践方面裁判者对抗辩事由的认识有误区,媒体胜诉率低,也存在“法官造法”等违法现象。如何构建媒体侵权责任的抗辩事由体系?首先,应当解决两个问题:一是如何界定媒体的合法行为与侵权行为;二是如何平衡表达自由与人格权之间的关系。由于我国法律及司法解释没有单独规定媒体侵权行为,对媒体的行为是否合法没有法律依据,只好从抗辩事由的角度来间接判断其行为是否合法,即符合抗辩事由规则的行为即为合法,反之就是侵权。如何平衡表达自由与人格权的关系是媒体侵权责任抗辩事由制度的基础问题,也是立法者与裁判者应该解决的首要问题。其次,如何完善我国媒体侵权责任的抗辩事由制度:应严格区分事实与意见的界限,才能真正辨别真实性抗辩与公正评论抗辩的界限,并细化五大抗辩事由的适用条件和适用范围;还应借鉴英美国家的司法判例,将“公众人物抗辩”规范化、制度化。最后,裁判者在如何适用抗辩事由的问题上,须参考国内外典型案例,用具体的判例指导审判,使抽象的规则具体化。
[Abstract]:With the continuous development of China's reform and opening up, the further emancipation of thought and the enhancement of people's consciousness of expressing opinions and supervising power, the media, as a social intermediate organization, is becoming more and more popular. As a link between political state and civil society, the media acts as the supervision of the legislation, the judiciary and the executive power, so it is also called "the fourth power" in the western society. However, the media with unlimited rights are infringing on people's rights, especially their personality rights. With the development of new media and self-media, such as Internet, mobile phone and so on, the expression of people's will is further enhanced, and the media infringing on personality rights becomes commonplace and even impossible to prevent. The conflict between freedom of expression and personal right has become a real problem to be solved. How to solve the conflict between freedom of expression and personality right, the more consistent view is to build a sound defense system of media tort liability. However, in terms of legislation, China has not yet formulated a "Media Law" to regulate the behavior of the media. The judicial interpretation of defense matters also has rough legislative techniques, no distinction between facts and opinions, a narrow range of impartial comments, and vague conditions of application. In judicial practice, there are some misunderstandings on defense, low media success rate and illegal phenomena such as "judge making law". How to construct the defense system of media tort liability? First, two problems should be solved: first, how to define the legal act and infringement of media; secondly, how to balance the relationship between freedom of expression and personality right. Since our country's laws and judicial interpretations do not separately stipulate media tort, there is no legal basis for whether the media's acts are lawful or not, so we can only indirectly judge whether the media's acts are lawful from the angle of defense reasons. That is to say, the act that accords with the rule of defense is legal, otherwise it is tort. How to balance the relationship between freedom of expression and personality right is the basic problem of the defense system of media tort liability, and it is also the first problem that legislators and referees should solve. Secondly, how to perfect the defense system of media tort liability in our country: we should strictly distinguish the boundary between fact and opinion, in order to truly distinguish the boundary of truth defense and fair comment defense. We should also draw lessons from the judicial precedents of Anglo-American countries to standardize and institutionalize the defense of public figures. Finally, the referee should refer to the typical cases at home and abroad and guide the trial with concrete precedents in order to make abstract rules concrete.
【学位授予单位】：江西财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】