论文部分内容阅读
对博客作者扩张适用针对定期出版物责任编辑的刑法典第57条构成为法律所禁止的类推适用。在实在法的层面,博客作者不负有阻止他人通过其博客空间传播非法内容的犯罪行为的法定义务。因此不能在刑法典第40条的意义上追究其疏于阻止的刑事责任。当然,这并不排除博客作者在作为攻击性言论的合作者或者作为他人犯罪行为的共犯(或参与者)时承担刑事责任。在应然法的层面,加授对信息内容的预防控制义务将导致互联网运作主体(博客作者,互联网服务提供者ISP等等)采取不能为人接受的、专横的监控措施。因而较为可欲的方案是立法者就这些主体设定某些特殊的标示、报告或使用过滤装置的义务。
Article 57 of the Penal Code of the Expansion of the Application of the Responsible Editor for Periodical Publications to Blog Authors Constitutes the Analogous Implications of Laws Prohibited. At the level of substantive law, bloggers do not have the legal obligation to prevent others from committing unlawful content through their blogosphere. It is therefore impossible to pursue its negligent criminal responsibility in the sense of article 40 of the Penal Code. This does not, of course, preclude bloggers from assuming criminal responsibility when acting as co-authors of offensive statements or as accomplices (or participants) in the criminal conduct of others. At the level of due diligence, increasing the obligation to prevent and control information content will lead to unacceptable and arbitrary monitoring measures by Internet operators (bloggers, Internet service providers ISPs, etc.). Therefore, the more desirable solution is for legislators to set certain special obligations on these subjects to label, report or use the filtering devices.