本文探讨了电子商务平台经营者的安全保障义务,分析了其背景、存在的问题以及学术界对其性质的不同观点。文章认为电商平台经营者的安全保障义务兼具法定义务和合同义务的双重性质,并从风险预防、风险避免和风险救助三个方面具体阐述了...本文探讨了电子商务平台经营者的安全保障义务,分析了其背景、存在的问题以及学术界对其性质的不同观点。文章认为电商平台经营者的安全保障义务兼具法定义务和合同义务的双重性质,并从风险预防、风险避免和风险救助三个方面具体阐述了安保义务的内容。在风险预防方面,强调了资质审核义务和风险告知义务的重要性;在风险避免方面,讨论了电商平台经营者应采取的措施以规避交易风险;在风险救助方面,指出了平台经营者在消费者权益受损时应采取的救助措施。文章还对电商平台经营者违反安全保障义务的法律责任形态进行了分析,提出了多元说中的连带责任与补充责任结合适用的观点。通过对这些问题的深入分析,本文旨在为电商平台经营者、消费者以及立法和司法实践提供指导,以促进电子商务行业的健康发展。This article discusses the safety and security obligations of e-commerce platform operators, analyzing their background, existing problems and the different views of academics on their nature. The article argues that the safety and security obligations of e-commerce platform operators combine the dual nature of statutory and contractual obligations, and specifically elaborates on the content of the security obligations from three aspects: risk prevention, risk avoidance and risk relief. In terms of risk prevention, it emphasizes the importance of the qualification audit obligation and the risk notification obligation;in terms of risk avoidance, it discusses the measures that the e-commerce platform operator should take to avoid the transaction risks;and in terms of risk relief, it points out the relief measures that should be taken by the platform operator in case of damage to the rights and interests of consumers. The article also examines the form of legal liability for the e-commerce platform operator’s violation of safety and security obligations, and puts forward the viewpoint that joint and several liability and supplementary liability in the pluralistic theory are applicable in combination. Through in-depth analyses of these issues, this article aims to provide guidance to e-commerce platform operators, consumers, as well as legislative and judicial practices, in order to promote the healthy development of the e-commerce industry.展开更多
数字经济的高速发展,带动了直播带货一类新兴商业模式的蓬勃发展,逐渐改变了消费者网络购物的方式及消费习惯。随着我国《信息网络传播权条例》《侵权责任法》《电子商务法》《民法典》对避风港规则的完善,对于网络服务提供者的地位与...数字经济的高速发展,带动了直播带货一类新兴商业模式的蓬勃发展,逐渐改变了消费者网络购物的方式及消费习惯。随着我国《信息网络传播权条例》《侵权责任法》《电子商务法》《民法典》对避风港规则的完善,对于网络服务提供者的地位与义务更加清晰,但是直播带货平台由于其本身属性问题,其复杂程度与一般的网络服务提供者、电子商务平台更甚,根据其不同的交易模式可分为“跳转式电商直播”与“非跳转式电商直播”,直播带货平台在不同交易模式下的避风港规则司法适用问题,需要明确其在商标权网络侵权中的地位与义务。作为纯粹的网络服务提供者或电子商务平台经营者,在现行法律规制下,对直播带货平台的审核义务不应过重。建议区分不同交易模式下的平台审核义务,尤其是“跳转式电商直播”的审核义务,避免滥用避风港规则。The rapid development of the digital economy has fueled the vigorous growth of emerging business models, such as live-streaming e-commerce, gradually changing the way consumers shop online and their consumption habits. With the improvement of the “safe harbor” rules in China’s Regulations on Internet Information Transmission Rights, Tort Liability Law, E-Commerce Law, and the Civil Code, the status and obligations of network service providers have become clearer. However, due to the inherent characteristics of live-streaming e-commerce platforms, their complexity surpasses that of general network service providers and e-commerce platforms. Based on different transaction models, they can be classified into “redirect-based e-commerce live streaming” and “non-redirect-based e-commerce live streaming”. The judicial application of safe harbor rules for live-streaming e-commerce platforms under these different transaction modes requires clarification regarding their status and obligations in trademark infringement cases online. As purely network service providers or e-commerce platform operators, the review obligations for live-streaming e-commerce platforms should not be overly burdensome under current legal regulations. It is suggested to differentiate the review obligations of platforms under different transaction models, especially the review obligations for “redirect-based e-commerce live streaming”, to avoid the misuse of safe harbor rules.展开更多
电商营销作为互联网营销的种类之一,是借助因特网完成一系列营销环节以达到营销目标的电子商务活动。在消费需求日益增长的今天,以电商营销平台为媒介的购物、消费方式越来越受到生产者、经营者与消费者的青睐。然而,随着我国电商营销...电商营销作为互联网营销的种类之一,是借助因特网完成一系列营销环节以达到营销目标的电子商务活动。在消费需求日益增长的今天,以电商营销平台为媒介的购物、消费方式越来越受到生产者、经营者与消费者的青睐。然而,随着我国电商营销规模的扩大,发生于平台内部的侵权行为也日益频繁。为了更好地保护消费者的合法权益,保障新兴电商平台的生存发展,必须对电商营销平台应当履行的法律义务进行明确的立法规制。因此,本文将根据我国电商营销的发展现状,结合现行立法与实务,对营销平台在履行安全保障义务、注意义务与资格审核义务中的不足之处进行分析,最终就完善电商营销平台的法律义务提出相关建议。As one of the types of Internet marketing, e-commerce marketing is an e-commerce activity that uses the Internet to complete a series of marketing links to achieve marketing goals. In today’s increasingly growing consumer demand, shopping and consumption methods mediated by e-commerce marketing platforms are increasingly favored by producers, operators, and consumers. However, with the expansion of e-commerce marketing scale in China, infringement behaviors occurring within platforms are becoming increasingly frequent. In order to better protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers and ensure the survival and development of emerging e-commerce platforms, it is necessary to establish clear legislative regulations on the legal obligations that e-commerce marketing platforms should fulfill. Therefore, based on the current development status of e-commerce marketing in China, combined with current legislation and practice, this article will analyze the shortcomings of marketing platforms in fulfilling security obligations, attention obligations, and qualification review obligations, and ultimately propose relevant suggestions for improving the legal obligations of e-commerce marketing platforms.展开更多
在电子商务运营过程中,消费者权益受损、知识产权侵权等现象不断出现,对现行法律制度提出了挑战,传统侵权法理论越来越难以解决数字平台经济新型法律责任问题,存在规则与理论研究供给不足等问题,需要重新界定平台经营者的法律地位与民...在电子商务运营过程中,消费者权益受损、知识产权侵权等现象不断出现,对现行法律制度提出了挑战,传统侵权法理论越来越难以解决数字平台经济新型法律责任问题,存在规则与理论研究供给不足等问题,需要重新界定平台经营者的法律地位与民事责任。《电子商务法》第38条第2款为平台经营者规定了“相应的责任”,有利于维护消费者的生命健康权益,对于网络购物纠纷解决和维护互联网环境都有着积极的促进作用,但责任的具体形式、归责原则、举证责任分配等均未明确,存在法律适用不明确和自由裁量的尺度过大的问题。如何准确裁量电子商务平台经营者的义务和责任,是本文重点研究的问题。In the process of e-commerce operation, various phenomena such as consumer rights violations and intellectual property infringement have emerged, posing challenges to the current legal system. The traditional theory of tort law is increasingly unable to solve the new legal liability problems in the digital platform economy. There are also problems of insufficient rules and theoretical research, and the legal status and civil liability of platform operators need to be redefined. Article 38, Paragraph 2 of “E-Commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China” stipulates that platform operators shall bear “corresponding liabilities” to protect the life and health rights of consumers. This is conducive to the resolution of online shopping disputes and the maintenance of the internet environment, but the specific forms of liability, the principle of liability, and the allocation of burden of proof have not been clarified, and there are problems of unclear legal application and excessive discretion. How to accurately regulate the duties and liabilities of e-commerce platform operators is the key issue that this paper focuses on.展开更多
《电子商务法》第38条第2款中的“相应的责任”自将《电子商务法》列入立法规划以来便争议较大,其责任形态的明确一直是司法实践与学术讨论上的焦点。“相应的责任”的责任形态的确立应当以《电子商务法》第32条第2款中的“关系消费者...《电子商务法》第38条第2款中的“相应的责任”自将《电子商务法》列入立法规划以来便争议较大,其责任形态的明确一直是司法实践与学术讨论上的焦点。“相应的责任”的责任形态的确立应当以《电子商务法》第32条第2款中的“关系消费者生命健康的商品或服务”、“资质资格未尽到审核义务”以及“安全保障义务”进行展开,同时应当兼顾立法宗旨与立法体系的连贯。“相应的责任”之责任形态的不清将会影响以责任形态为基础的归责原则与举证责任的分配。责任形态的“相应的责任”应当解释为按份责任的责任形态才能更好地为消费者权益提供保护以及促进电子商务的良好发展。The “corresponding liability” in Article 38, Paragraph 2 of the E-Commerce Law has been controversial since the E-Commerce Law was included in the legislative plan, and the clarification of its liability form has always been the focus of judicial practice and academic discussions. The establishment of the liability form of “corresponding liability” shall be carried out in accordance with the “goods or services related to the life and health of consumers”, “the obligation to review qualifications and qualifications” and “the obligation to ensure security” in paragraph 2 of article 32 of the E-Commerce Law, and shall take into account the coherence of the legislative purpose and the legal system. The ambiguity of the form of liability of “corresponding liability” will affect the principle of attribution and the allocation of the burden of proof based on the form of liability. The “corresponding responsibility” in the form of responsibility should be interpreted as the form of responsibility according to the responsibility, so as to better protect the rights and interests of consumers and promote the sound development of e-commerce.展开更多
电子商务的迅猛发展改变了人们的生活方式,随着电商平台的日益壮大,平台经营者对平台内经营者的管控能力也更强,因而应当承担的注意义务也更重。《电子商务法》第38条第二款规定的“相应责任”这一模糊表达给平台责任的确定带来极大争...电子商务的迅猛发展改变了人们的生活方式,随着电商平台的日益壮大,平台经营者对平台内经营者的管控能力也更强,因而应当承担的注意义务也更重。《电子商务法》第38条第二款规定的“相应责任”这一模糊表达给平台责任的确定带来极大争议。对平台责任的解释可以先确定审核义务和安全保障义务的内容和认定要素,再将“相应责任”限定在民事责任的框架下讨论。现实情况的复杂性决定了具体问题具体分析这一方案,在个案中分析权衡该适用连带责任、按份责任还是补充责任,可以避免平台承担过重或者过轻的责任。The rapid development of e-commerce has changed people’s lifestyles, and with the growing growth of e-commerce platforms, platform operators have a stronger ability to control the operators on the platform, so they should bear a heavier duty of care. The vague expression of “corresponding liability” under the second paragraph of Article 38 of the E-Commerce Law has brought great controversy to the determination of the liability of the platform. The interpretation of the platform’s liability can first determine the content and determination elements of the review obligation and the security guarantee obligation, and then limit the discussion of “corresponding liability” to the framework of civil liability. The complexity of the actual situation determines that this solution should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the analysis and weighing of joint and several liability, share liability or supplementary liability in individual cases can avoid the platform from assuming excessive or light liability.展开更多
文摘本文探讨了电子商务平台经营者的安全保障义务,分析了其背景、存在的问题以及学术界对其性质的不同观点。文章认为电商平台经营者的安全保障义务兼具法定义务和合同义务的双重性质,并从风险预防、风险避免和风险救助三个方面具体阐述了安保义务的内容。在风险预防方面,强调了资质审核义务和风险告知义务的重要性;在风险避免方面,讨论了电商平台经营者应采取的措施以规避交易风险;在风险救助方面,指出了平台经营者在消费者权益受损时应采取的救助措施。文章还对电商平台经营者违反安全保障义务的法律责任形态进行了分析,提出了多元说中的连带责任与补充责任结合适用的观点。通过对这些问题的深入分析,本文旨在为电商平台经营者、消费者以及立法和司法实践提供指导,以促进电子商务行业的健康发展。This article discusses the safety and security obligations of e-commerce platform operators, analyzing their background, existing problems and the different views of academics on their nature. The article argues that the safety and security obligations of e-commerce platform operators combine the dual nature of statutory and contractual obligations, and specifically elaborates on the content of the security obligations from three aspects: risk prevention, risk avoidance and risk relief. In terms of risk prevention, it emphasizes the importance of the qualification audit obligation and the risk notification obligation;in terms of risk avoidance, it discusses the measures that the e-commerce platform operator should take to avoid the transaction risks;and in terms of risk relief, it points out the relief measures that should be taken by the platform operator in case of damage to the rights and interests of consumers. The article also examines the form of legal liability for the e-commerce platform operator’s violation of safety and security obligations, and puts forward the viewpoint that joint and several liability and supplementary liability in the pluralistic theory are applicable in combination. Through in-depth analyses of these issues, this article aims to provide guidance to e-commerce platform operators, consumers, as well as legislative and judicial practices, in order to promote the healthy development of the e-commerce industry.
文摘数字经济的高速发展,带动了直播带货一类新兴商业模式的蓬勃发展,逐渐改变了消费者网络购物的方式及消费习惯。随着我国《信息网络传播权条例》《侵权责任法》《电子商务法》《民法典》对避风港规则的完善,对于网络服务提供者的地位与义务更加清晰,但是直播带货平台由于其本身属性问题,其复杂程度与一般的网络服务提供者、电子商务平台更甚,根据其不同的交易模式可分为“跳转式电商直播”与“非跳转式电商直播”,直播带货平台在不同交易模式下的避风港规则司法适用问题,需要明确其在商标权网络侵权中的地位与义务。作为纯粹的网络服务提供者或电子商务平台经营者,在现行法律规制下,对直播带货平台的审核义务不应过重。建议区分不同交易模式下的平台审核义务,尤其是“跳转式电商直播”的审核义务,避免滥用避风港规则。The rapid development of the digital economy has fueled the vigorous growth of emerging business models, such as live-streaming e-commerce, gradually changing the way consumers shop online and their consumption habits. With the improvement of the “safe harbor” rules in China’s Regulations on Internet Information Transmission Rights, Tort Liability Law, E-Commerce Law, and the Civil Code, the status and obligations of network service providers have become clearer. However, due to the inherent characteristics of live-streaming e-commerce platforms, their complexity surpasses that of general network service providers and e-commerce platforms. Based on different transaction models, they can be classified into “redirect-based e-commerce live streaming” and “non-redirect-based e-commerce live streaming”. The judicial application of safe harbor rules for live-streaming e-commerce platforms under these different transaction modes requires clarification regarding their status and obligations in trademark infringement cases online. As purely network service providers or e-commerce platform operators, the review obligations for live-streaming e-commerce platforms should not be overly burdensome under current legal regulations. It is suggested to differentiate the review obligations of platforms under different transaction models, especially the review obligations for “redirect-based e-commerce live streaming”, to avoid the misuse of safe harbor rules.
文摘电商营销作为互联网营销的种类之一,是借助因特网完成一系列营销环节以达到营销目标的电子商务活动。在消费需求日益增长的今天,以电商营销平台为媒介的购物、消费方式越来越受到生产者、经营者与消费者的青睐。然而,随着我国电商营销规模的扩大,发生于平台内部的侵权行为也日益频繁。为了更好地保护消费者的合法权益,保障新兴电商平台的生存发展,必须对电商营销平台应当履行的法律义务进行明确的立法规制。因此,本文将根据我国电商营销的发展现状,结合现行立法与实务,对营销平台在履行安全保障义务、注意义务与资格审核义务中的不足之处进行分析,最终就完善电商营销平台的法律义务提出相关建议。As one of the types of Internet marketing, e-commerce marketing is an e-commerce activity that uses the Internet to complete a series of marketing links to achieve marketing goals. In today’s increasingly growing consumer demand, shopping and consumption methods mediated by e-commerce marketing platforms are increasingly favored by producers, operators, and consumers. However, with the expansion of e-commerce marketing scale in China, infringement behaviors occurring within platforms are becoming increasingly frequent. In order to better protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers and ensure the survival and development of emerging e-commerce platforms, it is necessary to establish clear legislative regulations on the legal obligations that e-commerce marketing platforms should fulfill. Therefore, based on the current development status of e-commerce marketing in China, combined with current legislation and practice, this article will analyze the shortcomings of marketing platforms in fulfilling security obligations, attention obligations, and qualification review obligations, and ultimately propose relevant suggestions for improving the legal obligations of e-commerce marketing platforms.
文摘在电子商务运营过程中,消费者权益受损、知识产权侵权等现象不断出现,对现行法律制度提出了挑战,传统侵权法理论越来越难以解决数字平台经济新型法律责任问题,存在规则与理论研究供给不足等问题,需要重新界定平台经营者的法律地位与民事责任。《电子商务法》第38条第2款为平台经营者规定了“相应的责任”,有利于维护消费者的生命健康权益,对于网络购物纠纷解决和维护互联网环境都有着积极的促进作用,但责任的具体形式、归责原则、举证责任分配等均未明确,存在法律适用不明确和自由裁量的尺度过大的问题。如何准确裁量电子商务平台经营者的义务和责任,是本文重点研究的问题。In the process of e-commerce operation, various phenomena such as consumer rights violations and intellectual property infringement have emerged, posing challenges to the current legal system. The traditional theory of tort law is increasingly unable to solve the new legal liability problems in the digital platform economy. There are also problems of insufficient rules and theoretical research, and the legal status and civil liability of platform operators need to be redefined. Article 38, Paragraph 2 of “E-Commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China” stipulates that platform operators shall bear “corresponding liabilities” to protect the life and health rights of consumers. This is conducive to the resolution of online shopping disputes and the maintenance of the internet environment, but the specific forms of liability, the principle of liability, and the allocation of burden of proof have not been clarified, and there are problems of unclear legal application and excessive discretion. How to accurately regulate the duties and liabilities of e-commerce platform operators is the key issue that this paper focuses on.
文摘《电子商务法》第38条第2款中的“相应的责任”自将《电子商务法》列入立法规划以来便争议较大,其责任形态的明确一直是司法实践与学术讨论上的焦点。“相应的责任”的责任形态的确立应当以《电子商务法》第32条第2款中的“关系消费者生命健康的商品或服务”、“资质资格未尽到审核义务”以及“安全保障义务”进行展开,同时应当兼顾立法宗旨与立法体系的连贯。“相应的责任”之责任形态的不清将会影响以责任形态为基础的归责原则与举证责任的分配。责任形态的“相应的责任”应当解释为按份责任的责任形态才能更好地为消费者权益提供保护以及促进电子商务的良好发展。The “corresponding liability” in Article 38, Paragraph 2 of the E-Commerce Law has been controversial since the E-Commerce Law was included in the legislative plan, and the clarification of its liability form has always been the focus of judicial practice and academic discussions. The establishment of the liability form of “corresponding liability” shall be carried out in accordance with the “goods or services related to the life and health of consumers”, “the obligation to review qualifications and qualifications” and “the obligation to ensure security” in paragraph 2 of article 32 of the E-Commerce Law, and shall take into account the coherence of the legislative purpose and the legal system. The ambiguity of the form of liability of “corresponding liability” will affect the principle of attribution and the allocation of the burden of proof based on the form of liability. The “corresponding responsibility” in the form of responsibility should be interpreted as the form of responsibility according to the responsibility, so as to better protect the rights and interests of consumers and promote the sound development of e-commerce.
文摘电子商务的迅猛发展改变了人们的生活方式,随着电商平台的日益壮大,平台经营者对平台内经营者的管控能力也更强,因而应当承担的注意义务也更重。《电子商务法》第38条第二款规定的“相应责任”这一模糊表达给平台责任的确定带来极大争议。对平台责任的解释可以先确定审核义务和安全保障义务的内容和认定要素,再将“相应责任”限定在民事责任的框架下讨论。现实情况的复杂性决定了具体问题具体分析这一方案,在个案中分析权衡该适用连带责任、按份责任还是补充责任,可以避免平台承担过重或者过轻的责任。The rapid development of e-commerce has changed people’s lifestyles, and with the growing growth of e-commerce platforms, platform operators have a stronger ability to control the operators on the platform, so they should bear a heavier duty of care. The vague expression of “corresponding liability” under the second paragraph of Article 38 of the E-Commerce Law has brought great controversy to the determination of the liability of the platform. The interpretation of the platform’s liability can first determine the content and determination elements of the review obligation and the security guarantee obligation, and then limit the discussion of “corresponding liability” to the framework of civil liability. The complexity of the actual situation determines that this solution should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the analysis and weighing of joint and several liability, share liability or supplementary liability in individual cases can avoid the platform from assuming excessive or light liability.
