论文部分内容阅读
网站就是一个热闹自由的集贸市场。这么说来似乎有些大为不敬,但至少目前两者还有些共同之处。既然是集贸市场,谁家的蔬菜水果都能随便拿上来卖,哪怕是歪瓜咧枣。质量次点倒还可以忍受,但是一旦冒出些伪劣产品甚至违法的赃物,那就难免要有人站出来要说法。而说法的成立必然有大伙都认可接受的原则和基础,这样游戏才能继续下去。 集贸市场出现了不合法的东西,集贸市场在不知情的情况下到底应该连带多少责任?如果过多责罚已经尽力去管理的集贸市场,那么是不是只有集贸市场关门大吉那一天才能杜绝不合法货物的消失呢?最近有一种网络新株连义义的提法,说的是由于网站链接带来的纠纷问题,其实,这种株连主义已经遍及互联网的很多方面。如果我们用传统的眼光和传统的法律去看待这些事情,究竟是不是合理呢?
The site is a lively free bazaars. This seems a bit disrespectful, but at least for the moment the two have something in common. Since it is a bazaars, the fruits and vegetables of those who can easily take up to sell, even if the melon melon jujube. Quality point down can tolerate, but once the emergence of some fake or even illegally stolen goods, it is inevitable that someone must stand up to say. The establishment of the saying must have accepted the principles and foundations of everyone, so that the game can continue. There was something illegitimate in the bazaars, how much responsibility should the bazaars unite with in the end? If too much sanctions were made to manage the bazaars, is it not the day when the bazaars are closed? To eliminate the disappearance of unlawful goods? Recently, there was a reference to the new meaning of the Internet, which was due to the issue of disputes caused by the website link. Actually, this strain of connection has spread across many aspects of the Internet. If we look at these things with traditional wisdom and traditional laws, is it not reasonable?