美國網路內容服務提供者的法律定位與功能變遷──以國家行為理論的邊界與再構成為中心

The Legal Status and Functional Evolution of U.S. Internet Content Provider: Focusing on the Boundaries and Reconstitution of the State Action Doctrine

巨型數位平臺受公眾高度依賴，如何重構網路內容服務提供者、使用者與國家間之多邊法律關係，近年成為法學界、科技界和產業界共同竭力苦思的課題。數位平臺的核心技術與經營模式有別，對於侵權或不法內容的控管能力容有差異。諸國立法例多依業者的服務種類制定寬嚴不一之類型化監管規範，本文聚焦網路內容服務提供者，分析其針對第三方資訊之過濾與篩選行為能否評價為「（準）國家行為」，進而轉化為實質監管線上言論之公共職能機關，從而受憲法拘束。本文首先回顧美國《通訊端正法》第230條之立法背景與實務發展，檢視各學派之批判。其次，探討美國司法實務發展出的「國家行為理論」之理論適用與再構成，透過標竿判決分析平臺受憲法基本權規範拘束的可能性，最後提出結論。

In recent years, the public has become highly dependent on digital platforms, making the reconstruction of multilateral legal relationships among internet content providers, users, and the state a critical issue. Given the diverse and complex nature of internet service providers—and their varying capabilities in controlling infringing or illegal content—many countries generally classify regulations based on the types of services intermediaries offer, resulting in varying levels of regulatory stringency.
This paper focuses on internet content providers that generate communication content or offer search services. Specifically, it examines whether the filtering or screening actions taken by these platforms—particularly regarding cached or stored third-party information—can be considered“quasi-state actions.”If so, these internet content providers may effectively function as substantive public utilities with the authority to regulate online speech, thereby becoming subject to certain constitutional constraints.
This paper first explores the legislative origins and practical evolution of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a key statute concerning U.S. internet content providers. It critiques outdated aspects of the legislation based on scholarly analysis, followed by an argument grounded in the boundaries and reconstitution of the“state action doctrine”as developed in U.S. jurisprudence. Through an analysis of representative court rulings, this paper investigates the permissible scope of constitutional constraints on internet content providers.