Study Onthe Conviction Of QVOD Case

In the course of business operations,the QVOD Company has mainly implemented two types of interrelated and independent activities that infringe upon the two legal interests protected by criminal law.First,as a network service provider,knowing that users use the company's player to disseminate obscene articles and leave them alone,they do not perform their network security management duties in accordance with the law,and the supervisory department orders them to take corrective measures and refuses to make corrections.As a result,obscene videos spread across the Internet and crimes of non-action were established.This behavior is in line with the subjective and objective requirements of refusing to fulfill the obligation of network security management as stipulated in Article 286 of the Criminal Law,which falls within the scope of the penalty for the crime.However,the offence was established in 2015 and the law is not retroactive.Therefore,this behavior of the QVOD Company cannot be regarded as a crime.Second,the company's act of providing cached obscene articles to users in need is directly involved in the dissemination of obscene articles.It is subjectively known and has a purpose for profit,which is in line with the provisions of Article 361 of the Criminal Law.The subjective and objective constitutive elements of the crime of spreading pornographic materials shall be deemed as the crime of spreading pornographic material for profit.The QVOD Company's simple act of providing broadcast players is the same as all network technology providers.It can be exempted from the principle of technology neutrality,but when it knows that the software it provides is heavily used to disseminate obscene videos,the nature of liability occurs change.As an Internet service provider,it is obliged to supervise cyber security within its own capabilities.However,the QVOD Company does not care about them,which puts them in a position that may be criminalized by criminal law.At the same time,in order to enhance customer experience,the QVOD Company has developed a caching service system that directly intervenes in the transmission of obscene videos through the caching service system.At this point,the QVOD Company is not only a technology provider but also an implementer of pornographic articles.Therefore,the principle of technology neutrality is not applicable to the QVOD Company,whether it is from the aspect of providing broadcast players or the use of cache servers to participate in obscene video transmission.Neutral helping behavior may be exempt from penalties because of its neutrality.According to the traditional constitutional elements of constitutional compulsion,neutral helping behavior is a crime's help behavior,but in order to maintain the stable development of society,a part of the unfavorable neutral help behavior is excluded from the scope of punishment,but this does not mean that all neutral help behaviors are not Constitute a crime.The QVOD Company's “knowing,”“indulging,” and “fragmented storage of video” behaviors create risks that are not permitted by law,and in the results,the unauthorized risk created by the actors leads to a large number of obscene videos Spread on the Internet,and the results did not exceed the scope of protection of pornographic articles of transmission,so the behavior of fast broadcast companies is to help the dissemination of obscene articles.The QVOD Company has a subjective and deliberate intention to allow users to spread obscene articles on their players.This objectively provides convenience and creates risks that are not allowed by law.Of course,it is not a neutral aid that cannot be punished.