Tort Liability Of Internet Service Provider On The Internet Information Storage Space

Since the Information Age, the information produced and managed by human beings has been increasing rapidly. The storage of information has been an important part in human life. As the development of internet technology, Internet Information Storage Space has got lots of users as it is huge、convenience、and fast. However, Internet Information Storage Space normally is visited by internet instead of managed by the users themselves, as the consequence it has been the high-risk areas of tort. While invading into the Internet Information Storage Space, the infringer normally leak or utilize the information in the Space illegally, and the leaking and utilizing would damage the personal and property interest of the users.However, not all the information are the protected by PRC laws and regulations, it is unrealistic to protect all the information storaged in the Space under the principle of Information Freedom. Besides, the PRC Property Law has restricted the object of property right into personal property, real estate and the rights regulated in the law. And PRC Property Law has strictly setted the Numerus Clausus Principle. Thus, it is difficult to protect Internet Information Storage Space as property. Based on the two reasons, though the tort act occurred frequently, it is hard to regulate the tort act by laws and regulations.In order to solve this problem, this article divides the tort acting towards the acting invading into Internet Information Storage Space and the acting leaking or utilizing the information in it. And this article demonstrate the legal relationship of Internet Service Provider, the users and the direct infringer, and then demonstrate the legitimacy and necessity of setting Security Obligation to Internet Service Provider. At the same time, this article clears up the scope of the tort liability of Internet Service Provider and the direct infringer in order to protect the users.This article is consist of four parts. The first part is about the classification of tort acts. Based on the difference of information, tort acts are divided into acts violating the privacy right, intellectual property, and business secret. The classification is aimed at solving the unprotected situation of Internet Information Storage Space by turning the violation of information towards the violating of specific right.The second part is about the logical premise of the tort liability of Internet Service Provider, which is the Security Obligation. This part starts by analysising the nature of the Using Contract concluded by the users and Internet Service Provider, and then demonstrate the legitimacy and necessity of setting Security Obligation for Internet Service Provider. If Internet Service Provider do not completely perform the Security Obligation, then the direct infringer implement the tort act, Internet Service Provider should bear tort liability accordingly, and the tort liability should be supplementary liability.The third part focus on the constitutive requirements of the tort liability of Internet Service Provider. Specifically, Internet Service Provider should bear the tort liability as long as the direct infringer invades into the Internet Information Storage Space and leaks or utilizes the information in it, the interest of users has been damaged, Internet Service Provider failed to perform the Security Obligation, and Internet Service Provider has fault.The fourth part focus on the form of the tort liability of Internet Service Provider. Between the two subjects of tort act, Internet Service Provider should bear the supplementary liability instead of joint liability. And the tort act towards Internet Information Storage Space should be regulated by Article 37 of PRC Tort Law, not Article 36.The fifth part focus on the bear of the tort liability of Internet Service Provider. At the first place, it divides the scope of tort liability between the direct infringer and the re-user of information illegally, and between the Internet Service Provider and the direct infringer. Then, it demonstrates the liability form of Internet Service Provider, and Internet Service Provider could claim compensation from the direct infringer.