Font Size: a A A

Internet Service Provider’s Tort Liability

Posted on:2015-01-22Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:S P SunFull Text:PDF
GTID:2266330428956057Subject:Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
With the development of Internet technology, there are more and more onlineinfringements. The article36of Tort Low, which was passed in2009, defines theresponsibilities of online infringement clearly by rugulating its subject, object, andthe conditions of taking responsibility. It provides legal basis for protecting theinterests of citizens in the Internet world. However the rules are still controversialduring implementation. Firstly, there is a dispute on the definition of network serviceproviders. In this paper, writer tries to define its scope by comparing the views ofdifferent scholars. Secondly, the second and the third section of article36which usethe terms “notification” and “knowledgment” are also controversial. It is a commonrule that general terms would be used in legislations but since the lack of certainstandards, it’s hard to implement when facing complicated situations. The currentjudgments are usually cite the Regulation on the Protection of the Right to NetworkDissemination of Information or other relevant regulations, which actually makingthe section36of Tort Low impracticable and lacking of authorities. In terms of theabove problem, the writer tries to make some suggestions about the legislationperfection in this essay. Thirdly, the provisions of article36is a summary of theprevious legislative practice, it’s more comprehensive than other online infringementregulations, according to the rank of law, Tort law is the Basic Law, which has ahigher force than the previous regulations, judicial interpretation and so on. So thereis a dispute, whether the previous regulations can be continue to use or not? If theycan’t use, how to refine the rules about “notification” and “knowledgment”mentioned above. Besides, whether the Internet service provider should take theresponsibilities of censorship and what kind of extent should be considered asreasonable? This article discusses these issues basing on the above mentionedperspectives, consulting reference from both scholar’s researches and related Chineseand International legislations. This article also cites related cases, discussing andsummarizing the experience in the practical area about the service provider’s review obligation. Finally, the writer try to provide possible advices about how to define theresponsibilities of the Internet service provider.
Keywords/Search Tags:Internet Service Provider, Notification Rules, Knowledgment Rules, ReviewObligation
PDF Full Text Request
Related items