網絡服務提供者的妨害人責任，以合比例性為中心

Störerhaftung of ISPs:Centering on the Proportionality

基於網絡服務提供者在當代信息社會中的地位與權力，其應在一定程度上承擔他人權利保護的責任，域外主要有合同義務模式和法定救濟模式。從法經濟學的視角出發，法定救濟模式（妨害人責任）對於我國是更妥善的選擇。這種責任的承擔屬於權利救濟的方式，在德國法上與物權請求權同源，在英美法上起源於針對無過錯第三方的禁令，在我國法上屬於《民法典》第179條列舉的''法律責任''的一種。在網絡環境下，為保護權利人而採取的措施可能給網絡服務提供者造成額外成本，且牽涉他人的隱私與自由，乃至市場秩序以及社會發展的可能性等一般利益。因此，妨害人責任應以合比例性為其核心的構成要件，並引入合理的費用分擔機制。網絡服務提供者妨害人責任應與侵權損害賠償責任相區分。我國網絡服務提供者妨害人責任的構建應以《民法典》第1195條第1款、第2款前半句為基礎，並將第2款前半句與後半句作解釋論上的切割，使其分別成為妨害人責任與損害賠償責任的規範基礎。

"Based on their position and power in contemporary information society, the Internet Service Provider(ISP)should, to a certain extent, be responsible for the protection of the rights of others, which takes two models in foreign law, i.e .contractual obligation model and legal remedy model. From the perspective of law and economics, the legal remedy model (Störerhaftung) is more appropriate for China. Taking this responsibility constitutes a way of remedy. In German law it has the same origin as the rights in rem, in Anglo-Saxon law it originates from the injunction against innocent third parties, and in Chinese law it is one of the“legal liabilities”listed in Article 179 of the Civil Code. In the cyberspace, measures taken to protect rights-holders may result in additional costs for the ISP and impact such public interests as privacy and freedom of others, market order and potential social development. Therefore, the Störerhaftung should be based on proportionality as its core constituent element and introduce a reasonable cost-sharing mechanism. The Störerhaftung of ISP should be distinguished from the tort liability. The Störerhaftung of the ISP in China should be based on paragraph 1 and the first half of paragraph 2 of Article 1195 of the Civil Code, and the first half of paragraph 2 should be distinguished from the second half, so that they become the normative basis for Störerhaftung and tort liability respectively."