網路惡意不相容的法律構造與規制邏輯

The Legal Structure and Regulatory Logic of Internet Malicious Incompatibility: Based on the Internet Provisions of Anti-Unfair Competition Law

互聯網專條中的“惡意不相容”，具有經濟現象的描述性、內涵外延的伸縮性和邊界的模糊性，與反壟斷法和電子商務法的相關法條形成交疊，涉及反不正當競爭法與反壟斷法不同的調整定位和規制邏輯。“惡意不相容”由主客觀要素所構造，但具有規範文本的不完全性和語義學上的判斷餘地。“惡意”由“故意+惡性”構成，“惡性”應基於市場競爭的本性，以是否具有正當競爭利益為判斷核心。“不相容”具有網路語境下的特殊含義，但又有類型化和行為涵攝上的不確定等難題。與反壟斷法的規制邏輯不同，反不正當競爭法意義上的“網路不相容”，以競爭自由和正當競爭為原則，以“惡意不相容”為例外。對於“惡意不相容”所涉及的法條競合問題，應基於原則、政策與規則的差序關係，根據競爭法理念和適用規則，區分優位元性吸收、有限補充與排斥等不同選項，以此厘清競合性法條的選擇適用。

"The phrase“malicious incompatibility”in the Internet provisions has the following natures: the descriptive of economic phenomena, the flexibility of connotation and extension, and the ambiguity of boundaries, which overlap with the relevant provisions of Anti-Monopoly Law and E-Commerce Law , and inVolve the different adjustment positioning and regulatory logic of Anti-Unfair Competition Law and Anti-Monopoly Law .“Malicious incompatibility”consists of subjective and objective elements, however, it also has the incompleteness of the normative text and the judgment room for semantic.“Malicious”consists of“deliberate”and“malignancy”.“Malignancy”should be based on the nature of market competition, and it is based on whether there are legitimate competitive interests as the core of judgment.“Incompatibility”has the special meaning in the context of the Internet, but it also has problems such as typification and uncertainty in behavioral connotation. Different from the regulatory logic of the Anti-Monopoly Law , the“Internet incompatibility”in the sense of Anti-Unfair Competition Law is based on the principles of free and fair competition, with the exception of“malicious incompatibility”. Regarding the overlap issue of“malicious incompatibility”, it should be based on the hierarchy of principles, policies and rules, and in accordance with the legal concept of overlap and applicable rules, to distinguish different options such as preferential absorption, limited supplementation, and exclusion, and hereby, to clarifying the application of overlap of legal provisions."