网络侵权中网络服务提供者注意义务的认定

发布时间：2019-01-17 11:31

【摘要】：注意义务理论在侵权法中占有重要地位,其体现了安全优先、兼顾自由的立法理念,与物理空间中的注意义务一样,注意义务对保护网络空间同样具有重要作用,它对平衡权利人、网络服务提供者和社会公众这三方的利益起到了积极作用。当前我国现有立法对网络服务提供者注意义务的相关规定比较混乱,这不利于整个互联网行业的发展壮大。鉴于上述原因,建立适合我国国情的网络服务提供者注意义务规则体系非常必要。本文第一部分,根据现有网络服务提供者侵权责任相关的立法情况,对我国目前理论界和实践界对网络服务提供者在网络侵权中应承担哪些注意义务进行总结,指出在具体认定网络服务提供者的注意义务过程中主要面临的三个困境:网络服务提供者分类的混乱对注意义务认定的影响、通知删除制度中存在的不确定事项和“知道”判断标准的模糊性。本文第二部分,对网络服务提供者注意义务标准进行分析,通过总结传统“存在注意义务”的认定标准和违反注意义务的认定标准,分析传统注意义务的认定标准应用于网络侵权的可行性,指出网络空间中注意义务的特点,认为网络服务提供者注意义务的认定标准应分为一般判定标准和比较判定标准两种,前者有助于法院对此类案件进行定性分析,而后者有助于法院对此类案件进行定量分析。本文第三部分,针对第一部分提出的困境,分析网络服务提供者注意义务在司法实践中的具体认定,并把网络服务提供者分为三类:网络内容服务提供者、网络接入服务提供者、网络平台服务提供者,并在此基础上认为应根据不同侵权领域和不同性质的侵权信息对通知的有效性进行不同的认定,在实践中,依“专家”标准来判断是否应该及时删除侵权信息,并认为应按照常识和一般的规律来推定网络服务提供者是否“知道”侵权信息存在。
[Abstract]:The theory of duty of care plays an important role in tort law. It embodies the legislative idea of giving priority to security and giving consideration to freedom. Like the duty of care in physical space, the duty of care plays an important role in protecting cyberspace. It plays a positive role in balancing the interests of right holders, network service providers and the public. The current legislation of our country has confused regulations on the duty of care of network service providers, which is not conducive to the development and growth of the entire Internet industry. In view of the above reasons, it is necessary to set up the rules system of network service provider's duty of care. The first part of this article, according to the existing network service provider tort liability related legislation situation, to our country present theory circle and the practice circle to the network service provider which should undertake in the network infringement which attention duty carries on the summary, This paper points out that there are three main difficulties in the process of identifying the duty of care of network service providers: the influence of the confusion of the classification of network service providers on the recognition of the duty of care. The uncertainty existing in the notice deletion system and the ambiguity of the criterion of "knowing". In the second part of this paper, the author analyzes the standards of network service providers' duty of care, and summarizes the traditional standards of "existing duty of care" and the standard of breach of duty of care. This paper analyzes the feasibility of applying the traditional standards of duty of care to network tort, points out the characteristics of duty of care in cyberspace, and points out that the standards of recognition of duty of care of network service providers should be divided into two types: general criteria and comparative criteria. The former is helpful to the qualitative analysis of such cases, while the latter is helpful to the quantitative analysis of such cases. In the third part of this paper, in view of the dilemma raised in the first part, the author analyzes the specific cognizance of the duty of care of network service providers in judicial practice, and divides the network service providers into three categories: network content service providers, and network content service providers. The network access service provider, the network platform service provider, and on the basis of this, think that the effectiveness of the notice should be determined according to the different tort fields and different nature of tort information, in practice, According to the criterion of "expert", whether the infringing information should be deleted in time should be judged, and it is believed that the network service provider should be presumed to be "aware" of the existence of infringing information according to common sense and general rules.
【学位授予单位】：宁波大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】