网络服务提供商侵权问题研究

发布时间：2018-01-25 08:07

本文关键词： 网络服务提供商构成要件归责原则责任承担形态间接侵权　出处：《华东政法大学》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：网络技术随着时代的发展日新月异,网络发展产生的巨大影响渗透入当前生活的方方面面。我国有着基数庞大的网络用户,根据《中国互联网发展状况统计报告》的第35次统计结果,到2014年12月为止,我国已经有超过5.5亿人次的手机网络用户,网络变得越来越便利将互联网的普及率带至47.9%。随着网络用户人数的增加,网络事务的不断增多,现存的法律制度也受到了日益发展的网络科技的巨大挑战。本文第一部分讲了网络服务提供商的概念与类型、归责基础。随着网络技术提高新型服务方式的出现,网络服务商概念内涵也在不断扩大中,在当前学术界,关于其概念与类型区分存在广义说与狭义说。广义网络服务商包括内容服务与平台服务提供者,狭义网络商仅包括平台服务提供商。在当前的外国立法中,将网络服务提供商进行分类,并且根据不同的类型来规定不同的免责条款,是外国立法中比较普遍采取的一种立法方式。关于网络服务提供商之概念,我们应当明确《侵权责任法》以及我们的研究中并不包括网络内容提供商,网络内容提供商的侵权问题与一般侵权问题并无二致,因此,我们的研究特指网络平台服务提供商。关于网络服务提供商的类型,虽然《侵权责任法》并未详细列举,笔者认为《信息网络传播权保护条例》的规定中“自动接入服务”,“自动传输服务”,“自动存储”,“提供信息存储空间”,“提供搜索或链接服务”几种类型是借鉴了外国立法例之后作出的分类,并且对其不同的免责事由的适用也作出了科学的划分,可以满足实践的需求。在适用《侵权责任法》进行分析断案时,应据此对其进行分类并区分不同免责条款。关于网络服务商侵权责任归责基础学界观点主要有如下三种:1.过错论:网络服务提供商之所以应当对侵权承担责任的原因在于其对于侵权事实的发生具有过错。2.直接获利论:网络服务提供商因其提供网络服务的经营内容而获利,从而对于其经营内容范围内的侵权亦应负有责任。3.实际控制论:网络服务商因对侵权事实有实际控制力,因此如果没有采取合理措施,就应当承担责任。过错论、直接获利论与实际控制论作为当前三种主流理论,都具有相当程度上的影响力。然而亦存在一些的不足,在笔者认为修正后网络服务商侵权责任理论基础应为:网络商在合理过滤技术设立前提下,由于知悉和并未及时采取措施处理侵权事宜而应承担侵权责任。第二部分讨论网络服务提供商侵权责任之归责原则。外国有关网络服务侵权责任研究较之我国有的时间更早,具有借鉴意义。美国对不同类型网络服务提供商规定不同免责条款,确立了严格责任限制之归责原则;欧盟采取的为过错责任原则;德国在网络内容提供者责任承担中采取的为无过错责任的归责原则,而在其他类网络服务提供商的责任承担方面均采取的是过错责任原则。《侵权责任法》36条由第二款规定了“通知-移除”规则,第三款规定了“知道”规则。在理论界对于不同类型网络服务提供商适用的归责原则是否应当统一也具有争议,笔者认为,网络服务提供商侵权责任归责原则为过错责任原则更为合理:对知识产权适用过错推定,对一般权利则适用过错原则。第三部分讲网络服务提供商侵权责任之构成要件。笔者认为“三要件说”较为合理:三个要件即损害事实、因果关系和主观过错足以概括一般侵权责任之构成。《侵权责任法》第36条的第2款与第3款,在借鉴了国外的相关制度的情况下,为我国网络服务提供商侵权责任的成立中的主观过错构成要件之成立提供了法律依据;关于损害事实网络服务提供商侵权所侵犯之客体分为财产性权利与人身性权利,财产性权利如侵犯他人版权或者商标权从而谋取经济上的利益,人身性权利如对他人之隐私披露、名誉诋毁等使得权利人精神上利益遭到侵犯之情况。被侵权方无论是基于过错推定的知识产权权利人或者是基于过错原则归责之一般权利的权利人,均需要在诉讼中对自己所遭到的损害进行证明;网络服务提供商之侵权责任的成立,必须是网络服务提供商之行为与侵权损害后果之间存在有因果联系,这里的因果联系包括两层:首先是网络用户利用网络服务提供商提供之便利实施了侵权行为与被侵权方之损害结果存在有因果联系;其次是网络服务提供商之注意义务未履行对于侵权损害后果的发生或者扩大存在有因果联系。在这两层因果联系中,前者是后者发生之前提。第四部分讨论网络服务提供商侵权责任之承担的问题。本部分通过对网络服务提供商责任形承担形式不同阶段与不同形式的研究和讨论,笔者认为关于我国的网络服务提供商侵权责任形态承担,应当适用外部连带责任与内部按份责任。立法中出于一定目的之考虑课以网络服务提供商连带责任,使得被侵权方的救济更为方便及时,而我们在对其内部责任分配时也应当注意,也不应使网络服务提供商承担终局责任,而是应当在连带责任承担之后在内部按照各自过错与原因力,对份额进行合理的分配。第五部分讨论的是间接侵权责任。构建间接侵权制度是外国的立法例中解决网络服务提供商侵权制度的普遍做法,本部分通过这样的一种做法与我国的采用“共同侵权”方式来解决网络服务提供商侵权责任的模式相比较所存在的优势的研究,讨论了间接侵权概念在我国提出时的争议,间接侵权所包括的类型,并且借鉴了国外的间接侵权制度构建框架,对我国的网络服务商侵权责任的相关法律规定提出立法构想与修改建议。
[Abstract]:With the development of network technology change rapidly, the huge impact of the development of network has infiltrated in all aspects of life. China has a huge number of Internet users, according to the thirty-fifth statistical results of development of Chinese internet report >, until December 2014, there have been more than 550 million people in the mobile phone users in China, network become more and more convenient to the Internet popularity rate to 47.9%. with the increase of the number of network users, network services continue to increase, the existing legal system has also been a huge challenge to the growing network of science and technology. In the first part of this paper about the concept and types of network service providers, imputation basis. With the increase of the new service the way of the network technology, the connotation of the concept of ISP is also expanding, in the current academic circles about the concept and types of distinguish between broad sense say The generalized and narrow sense. The network service provider includes content services and platform service providers, network operators including only narrow platform service providers. In the current foreign legislation, network service providers are classified, and according to different types require different disclaimers, is a kind of legislation is generally adopted in foreign legislation. Concept of the network service provider, we should clear the tort liability law study < > and we did not include the Internet content provider, there is no infringement of Internet content providers and general tort problems caused by two, therefore, the service provider network platform. We study in particular types of network service providers, although the "tort liability law the author thinks that not a detailed list >, < Information Network Transmission Right Protection Ordinance" provisions of the "automatic access service", "automatic transmission service", "Automatic storage", "information storage", "search or link service types from the classification made after the foreign legislation, and the different exemption applies also to make a scientific division, can meet the needs of practice. In the case of the application of the" tort liability law >, we should classify and distinguish different disclaimer. About Internet service providers tort liability imputation basis of the academic point of view there are three main types: 1. fault theory: the network service provider is that it has a fault for.2. should be the direct benefit of the fact of infringement reasons of tort liability in network because of the service provider to provide network services business and profit, which for its business within the scope of tort should be responsible for the actual control of.3. network service providers because of the infringement In the actual control, so if you do not take reasonable measures, it shall bear the liability. Fault theory, direct profit theory as the three mainstream theories and actual control, has considerable influence. However, there are some deficiencies in the modified theory of the tort liability of Internet service providers should be for network operators in the establishment of reasonable filtration technology under the premise of knowing and not due to take timely measures to deal with matters of infringement shall bear tort liability. The second part discusses the imputation principle of the tort liability of Internet service provider. The research on the tort liability of network service foreign than China earlier, has the reference significance. The provisions of the different types of network service providers of different exemption clause, established the strict limitation of liability imputation principle; the principle of fault liability for the EU to take Germany within the network; Content providers responsibility for taking no fault liability principle, and in other types of network service providers are taking responsibility is the principle of fault liability. The tort liability law >36 by the provisions of the second paragraph of the "notice - remove" rules, the provisions of the third paragraph of the "know" rule in the theory circle. The imputation principle for the different types of network service providers should also have uniform dispute, the author believes that the network service provider, the imputation principle of tort liability fault liability principle is more reasonable: the intellectual property rights of the general presumption of fault, it applies the principle of fault. The third part is about the infringement of the network service provider of the elements. The author thinks that the "three elements" is more reasonable: three elements namely damage fact, causality and subjective fault to summarize general tort liability form of tort liability. Any law > thirty-sixth of paragraph second and paragraph third, in reference to the relevant foreign system under the condition of the establishment of China's Internet service providers tort liability in the subjective fault of the components of the establishment provides a legal basis; the object of damage to the fact that Internet service providers tort infringes the property rights and the people divided into personal rights, property rights such as infringement of copyright or trademark rights to seek economic benefits, such as personal rights of others privacy disclosure, reputation slander obliges spiritual interests infringed the infringed party. Whether it is based on the presumption of fault, intellectual property rights or general rights the principle of fault liability based on the rights of the people, are in need of litigation by his own damage proof; tort liability of Internet service provider of network services must be provided. There is a causal link between taking the behavior and consequence of tort, the causal link consists of two layers: the first is to provide network users to facilitate the implementation of infringement and tort party results in a causal link with the network service provider; second is the network service provider that does not fulfill its obligations for tort consequences there is a causal relationship between the occurrence or expansion. In the two layer of causality, the former is the premise of the latter. The fourth part discusses the network service providers bear tort liability problems. Through this part of the network service provider liability form assume different forms with different forms of the stage of research and discussion, the author thinks that the bear form network service provider tort liability in China, shall be jointly and severally liable according to internal and external responsibility. Consider a certain purpose for legislation A network service provider liability, the infringement relief party is more convenient and timely, and we in the internal allocation of responsibility should also pay attention to, also should not make the network service provider to take the final responsibility, but should be after be liable in accordance with their respective fault and causes in the internal force, on reasonable distribution share. The fifth part is to discuss the indirect infringement liability. Constructing the system of indirect infringement is a common practice to solve the network service provider tort legislation cases of foreign research, this part adopts "through such an approach and our common tort" way to solve the infringement of the network service provider model compared to the existing advantages the discussion of the concept of indirect infringement dispute in our country is proposed, including the types of indirect infringement, and from the system of indirect infringement of foreign construction The framework provides legislative ideas and amendments to the relevant legal provisions of the tort liability of network service providers in China.

【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】