Some Issues Of Determination Of Internet Spreading Behavior In Criminal Law

Internet is indispensable tools in our work and daily life. As the sustained and rapid development of advanced Internet technologies, networks have brought great convenience for our work and life, and it deeply involved in the modern business model. It is also a new economic pattern. But the network is a double-edged sword; with bringing convenience for our work it also brings some risks in social management. There always someone misuse of advanced network technologies for chasing private interests. Recently, criminal scholars, judicial practice, even normal people have opinion on "the qvod case". And the suspect’s speech of “technology itself does not shameful” causes discussion on the nature of "neutral technology behavior”. There are also some “depth links” behaviors before this case, and causing disputes between scholars.This first chapter is intended to distinguish the concept of spreading, Internet spreading, the internet spreading in civil law and the Internet spreading in criminal law, and to draw three basic characteristics of Internet spreading in criminal law. The second chapter proposes the difficulties in distinguishing the difference between "playing software based on P2 P technology" and " deep linking " in judicial practice, and define the nature of internet spreading based on three basic characteristics of Internet spreading in the first chapter, and determine the suspect’s subjective state as to know or should have known. And we also propose judging of such behavior should focus on crime constitution, and fully consider the requirement of crime. On the other side, we distinguish the concept of spreading in semantics and the concept of helping behavior in criminal law from the concept of accessory discontinuance of joint crime, discuss whether this kind of behavior belong to the helping behavior in criminal law and apply to theory of accessory discontinuance of joint crime,discuss the possibility of the application to the theory of “Neutral helping behavior” in criminal law.Synthesize the two above aspects and then judge the “playback software based on the peer to peer technology ” and “deep linking” behaviors according to criminal law thoroughly, anticipate to solve Identify problems in this kind of cases in judicial practice. The chapter three discusses the relationship between protections and restriction of internet spreading technology innovation, and shall make the balance of protecting internet spreading technology innovation and criminal restriction as a guidance. The criminal law should consider the protection of technology innovation, and should restrict the behavior committed criminal law, and shouldn’t make the technology innovation as a excuse for avoiding legal sanctions.