网络交易平台提供者的替代责任

发布时间：2019-03-21 08:36

【摘要】：近十年,电子商务在我国得到了蓬勃的发展,然而假冒伪劣商品横行,借助互联网,商家实施侵权行为的成本更低,侵权行为产生的影响也更加广泛。网络交易平台提供者作为电子商务的特殊主体,在电子商务交易中获得了巨大的利益,而商标权、著作权的权利人却面临着大规模的侵权行为,因此为了电子商务市场的健康发展,有必要平衡双方的利益。替代责任的适用有利于调整双方当事人的利益,促进网络交易平台提供者完善对交易平台的监督和管理,从而推动电子商务的健康发展。因此有必要研究我国网络交易平台提供者的替代责任。本文主要由三部分构成:本文第一部分主要对替代责任的概念、特征以及范围进行比较分析,来论述替代责任的实质意义以及理论基础。本文认为,替代责任是英美法系特有概念,其不同于大陆法系的为他人行为之责任。替代责任是指第三人基于与行为人的特殊关系而承担的责任,替代责任不同于第三人基于违反自己对行为人的义务或对受害人的义务而承担的责任。替代责任最主要的特征是第三人与行为人之间具有控制关系。无论是大陆法系还是英美法系,一般都将雇主责任规定为替代责任,而将监护人被监护人责任排除在替代责任之外,美国则将替代责任发展到了独立缔约人之间的版权侵权领域,并认为在网络环境中,替代责任同样适用。本文即是在此基础上分析网络交易平台提供者所承担的替代责任。本文第二部分主要分析网络交易平台提供者替代责任的产生与发展及其构成要件。本部分通过分析美国判例法上的独立缔约人之间的替代责任的发展,确定网络交易平台提供者替代责任的构成要件:对侵权行为具有控制的权利和能力并能从中获取直接的经济利益。本文通过对美国判例的比较分析,认为构成要件中的控制标准宜采用实际控制标准,而直接经济利益的认定仅需要第三人获得的经济利益与侵权行为具有因果关系。本文第三部分主要通过对我国关于网络交易平台提供者责任的立法以及司法实践中的不足进行分析,确认我国并没有关于网络交易平台提供者替代责任的规定,以致于司法实践中难以运用。但我国网络交易平台提供者在某些情况下已经具有承担替代责任的条件与能力。本文第四部分基于第三部分的分析,对我国适用网络交易平台提供者替代责任提出以下建议:明确网络交易平台提供者的法律地位;建立多元责任形态;,明确网络交易平台提供者承担替代责任的归责原则——无过错责任原则;同时基于我国国情,应将独立缔约人之间的替代责任同时适用于版权领域和商标权领域。
[Abstract]:In recent ten years, e-commerce has been developing vigorously in our country. However, fake and inferior goods are rampant. With the help of Internet, the cost of infringing acts is lower and the influence of infringing actions is more extensive. As a special subject of e-commerce, the provider of network trading platform has gained great benefits in e-commerce transactions, while the owners of trademark rights and copyrights are faced with large-scale infringement. Therefore, for the healthy development of e-commerce market, it is necessary to balance the interests of both sides. The application of alternative liability is beneficial to adjust the interests of both parties, promote the network trading platform providers to improve the supervision and management of the trading platform, and thus promote the healthy development of electronic commerce. Therefore, it is necessary to study the alternative responsibility of network trading platform providers in China. This paper mainly consists of three parts: the first part of this paper mainly analyzes the concept, characteristics and scope of substitution responsibility, to discuss the substantive significance and theoretical basis of substitution responsibility. This paper argues that alternative liability is a unique concept of Anglo-American law system, which is different from the civil law system of responsibility for the conduct of others. Alternative liability refers to the liability of the third party based on the special relationship with the actor, which is different from the liability of the third party based on the breach of its obligations to the actor or to the victim. The main feature of substitution liability is that there is a control relationship between the third party and the actor. In both civil and common law systems, employer liability is generally defined as an alternative liability, and guardianship is excluded from the substitute liability. The United States has developed alternative liability to copyright infringement among independent contracting parties, and believes that in the network environment, alternative liability is also applicable. This paper is based on the analysis of the network trading platform providers bear the alternative responsibility. The second part of this paper mainly analyzes the emergence and development of the substitution responsibility of network trading platform providers and its constituent elements. This section analyzes the development of alternative responsibilities between independent contracting parties in case law in the United States. To determine the constituent elements of the substitute liability of the network trading platform provider: to have the right and ability to control the tort and to obtain direct economic benefits from it. Through the comparative analysis of American jurisprudence, this paper holds that the control standard in the constituent elements should adopt the actual control standard, while the identification of direct economic interests only needs the economic benefit obtained by the third party and the tort has a causal relationship. The third part of this paper mainly through the analysis of our country on the network trading platform provider responsibility legislation and judicial practice deficiencies, confirm that our country does not have the provisions on the network trading platform provider substitution responsibility, As a result, it is difficult to use in judicial practice. However, China's network trading platform providers in some cases have the conditions and capabilities to assume alternative responsibilities. The fourth part of this paper, based on the analysis of the third part, puts forward the following suggestions: clarifying the legal status of the network trading platform providers, establishing the multi-liability form, and putting forward the following suggestions on the replacement responsibility of the network trading platform providers in China. At the same time, according to the national conditions of our country, the substitute liability between independent parties should be applied to copyright field and trademark right field, at the same time, the non-fault liability principle, which is the principle of no-fault liability, should be applied to the domain of copyright and trademark right at the same time.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】