Online platforms can precisely match supply and demand,rapidly improve the efficiency of social resource allocation,and make important contributions to the development of China's social economy.However,a series of cases show that there is a causal relationship between the inaction of online platforms and the infringement of major legal interests.The theory of"neutral helping behavior"should not be used to deny the criminality of online platform inaction.Having the duty of conduct is the prerequisite for the establishment of the crime of omission of platforms.In essence,the obligation comes from the"domination to the cause of the result".The content of online platforms as an obligation has been clearly stipulated in the relevant administrative laws and regulations,but the formal obligation must be tested by the substantive deontology.There are two imputation paths against intentional inaction of online platform:the principal and the accomplice.The legal threshold of imputation to principal offender is high.In most cases,the criminal responsibility of platforms should be investigated from the perspective of accomplice.The crime of helping information network criminal activities is not a criminalization of aiding behavior in legislation,the imputation of platform inaction according to this crime is still a continuation of the path of joint liability for accomplice.Platform inaction with the nature of indirect assistance can also be included in the scope of this crime.It is impossible for an online platform to be convicted a crime of inaction due to its negligence.
关键词
网络平台/不真正不作为犯/中立帮助行为/结果原因支配说/最小从属性说
Key words
online platform/non-typical omission crime/neutral helping behavior/consequence-cause domination theory/minimum subordination theory
维普
万方数据