Research On The Non-fair Terms Of Format Contracts In Internet Platforms

In the area of contractual obligations in civil law,the principle of autonomy has always been followed,which is due to the fact that the conclusion and performance of a contract are based on the intention and choice of the contracting parties,while the form contract,as a special type of contract arising from the pursuit of efficiency in the process of social and economic development,lacks the necessary autonomy and choice of the parties at the time of conclusion,which is essentially the pursuit of efficiency at the expense of equality,and is prone to inequality and unfairness in contractual rights and obligations due to the unequal status of the parties.Essentially,efficiency is pursued at the expense of equality,which can easily lead to inequality and inequity in contractual rights and obligations due to the unequal status of the parties.For form contracts applied in Internet platforms,the problem of unfair terms in form contracts should be studied in the light of the characteristics of the Internet as distinct from the traditional format contract.Through a comparative study of the traditional and online forms of form contracts,this article clarifies the unique attributes of form contracts in the Internet environment and the problems of unfair terms in their application and judicial practice from the perspective of the specific criteria for judging the principle of fairness from the perspective of the characteristics of the Internet,so as to analyse the effective countermeasures for solving the problem of unfair terms in form contracts on Internet platforms.The analysis of the application of form contracts on Internet platforms and the current situation summarizes four types of unfair terms and summarizes the corresponding problems in form contracts on platforms that are frequently used by the general public today.First,the effect of disclosure in the formation of a form contract does not meet the environmental conditions for a genuine agreement between the contracting parties,resulting in an unequal status of the contracting parties.Secondly,the right to amend the content of the contract is only enjoyed by the operator and can be suspended at will.Thirdly,there are problems with the application of jurisdictional clauses in the dispute resolution process,which affects the enthusiasm of the user community to defend their rights.Fourthly,the setting of invasive clauses exposes the privacy of users to the risk of blurred boundaries.And proposes targeted regulation to the four types of non-equitable provisions mentioned above,firstly,improve relevant legislation to suit the characteristics of the Internet and propose a more complete disclosure mechanism for platform operators to fulfill their duty of reminder in a way that is more in line with the online environment.Secondly,the establishment of a pre-screening mechanism and the standardisation of judicial discretion to form a more effective supervision of unilateral changes.Furthermore,Open up the right to choose the court of jurisdiction and broaden the channels of redress for user groups,thus solving the problem of difficulties in defending rights caused by agreed jurisdiction.Finally,by establishing an open form for infringement clauses and personalising privacy authorisations to achieve the corrective purpose of effectively protecting user privacy.