Research On The Legal Regulation Of Blocking Advertising In The Internet Field

At present,with the prosperity and development of the Internet digital economy,a new business operation model has been formed.At the same time,the interest disputes among Internet operators have also been generated.With the rise and development of the Internet industry,the number of Internet advertisements is in direct proportion to the rise,and the dispute over Internet advertising behavior also appears.Shielding advertising operators manufacturing software can shield advertising,in a certain range of impact on the economic benefits of website operators and advertisers,followed by a series of lawsuits.So far,the concept of Internet advertising blocking has not been clearly defined in Chinese legal norms.Article 12 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law revised in 2017 set up a special fund for Internet,but its content is too abstract and vague to be directly applied to the trial process of Internet advertising blocking.In the dispute cases of Internet blocking advertising behavior,this behavior is finally judged as unfair competition behavior.There are many debates in the theoretical circle,and the main points of contention are as follows: whether the recognition of Internet advertising should be based on the competitive relationship between operators;Whether the "free video + advertising" mode and "paid video + free advertising" mode in the commercial operation mode should be given legal status;Whether the behavior of Internet blocking advertisements violates the principle of good faith;Whether consumers’ interests should be included in the judgment factors of competitive behavior and so on,the research and analysis of the above focus of controversy will help us to deepen our understanding of the Internet advertising blocking behavior.For the Internet advertising blocking behavior,it can not be generalized,directly identified as legitimate or improper behavior,it needs to be combined with the specific case to apply the concept of multi-interest balance,combined with the interests of website operators,operators of the blocking party and consumers,in pursuit of the overall social welfare maximization of the goal of the judgment of Internet advertising blocking behavior.This paper starts from the concept of the Internet advertising and the behavior of the Internet advertising mask,analyzes and summarizes the judgment concepts in typical cases at home and abroad,studies the legitimate judicial judgment standards of the behavior of the Internet advertising mask,and builds the regulation strategies of the behavior of the Internet advertising mask.This paper is generally divided into seven parts.The first part is the introduction,and the second part defines the relevant concepts of Internet advertising and Internet advertising behavior and expounds the theoretical content.The third part introduces the case of typical cases,summarizes the focus of the dispute and the judgment point,and evaluates the legitimate judicial judgment standard from the perspective of the court,which concretely shows the competition,the principle of honesty and credit,business ethics,subjective intention and multi-stakeholder.The fourth part analyzes the legal status quo and dilemma of Internet blocking advertising behavior.The fifth part cites the classic trial cases of the United States and Germany,analyzes and compares the trial principles and judgment views of foreign countries,and forms judicial ideas with Chinese characteristics in combination with China’s national conditions.The sixth part,from the perspective of practice to build our regulation strategy of Internet advertising screening behavior,on the one hand through the unified refining of legal identification standards,introducing punitive compensation mechanism,on the other hand,choose the concept of balance of interests,comprehensive measurement of the relationship between operators,consumers and social public interests,to maintain judicial fairness and justice,in order to achieve the goal of maximizing the total social welfare.