论文部分内容阅读
针对人肉搜索第一案,主流观点认为该案的判决体现了法律对公民网络隐私权的保护。然而,本文运用法经济学原理对该案所作的实证分析表明:考虑到网络服务提供者的营利性和受害人对保持沉默的偏好,在网络侵权案件中法律没有对当事人的隐私权提供有效保护。人肉搜索第一案的判决结果意味着将来不会再有人因人肉搜索而诉诸司法途径来保护自己的隐私权,该案将同时成为人肉搜索“最后一案”。为了有效保护公民的隐私权,一方面,《侵权责任法》草案的相关条款必须得到修正,应当对营利性网络服务提供者适用无过错责任原则;另一方面,主管机关对于故意发布侵权信息的营利性网络服务提供者要实施行政处罚。
The first case of human flesh search, the mainstream view that the case of the decision reflects the law on the privacy of citizens online protection. However, the empirical analysis of the case by using the principle of law and economics shows that the law does not provide effective protection of the privacy of the parties in the network infringement cases, considering the profitability of the network service providers and the preference of the victims for silence. . The result of the first case of human flesh search means that in the future no one will resort to any judicial means to protect their privacy because of human search, and the case will become the “final case” of human beings at the same time. In order to effectively protect the privacy of citizens, on the one hand, the relevant provisions of the draft “Tort Liability Act” must be amended, the principle of no-fault liability should be applied to for-profit network service providers; on the other hand, the competent authority for the deliberate release of infringing information For-profit network service providers to implement administrative penalties.