Beijing University E-Commerce Research Center released the influence of the "E-Commerce Law" influence report and the top ten e-commerce cases

People’s Network Beijing, September 3, recently, "The E-Commerce Law" issued by the Beijing University Electronic Commission Research Center "Will be held in Beijing.

At the meeting, the Beijing University Electronic Commerce Law Research Center issued the "three anniversary of the issuance of e-commerce law and the case of the top ten e-commerce cases". The top ten cases selected from the "Electronic Commerce Law" to the current decisions, including representative and typical cases, including e-commerce subject types, service agreements and transaction rules, platform governance and platform responsibilities, platform intellectual property protection, no Just a seven types of legitimate competition and data rights disputes, personal information protection and new e-commerce regulations.

These cases have triggered high concern, and the court correlation analysis, argumentation, and judgment have strong reference significance and orientation. Case 1. The first case of the applet – the network service provider’s platform properties "Notification-Delete" rules should be established on the basis of the network service provider has control infringement and accurate deletion. The defendant provides the basic network service of the small program architecture and the access, and the applet is stored on the developer server. The service has the characteristics of non-differential, technical and passiveness. Its nature is not provided with information storage space. Or search, link service, so the applet service provider should not apply "Notification-Delete" rules. Case II, "Exceeding" first case – platform operators must not unilaterally change the service agreement between the contract platform operator and the user, and in the case of no invalidation, the two can be effectively constrained. Do not change the relevant provisions unilaterally; even if the platform sets unilateral change rights in the protocol, it is still restrictions on the standards of fair principles, format clauses, and the "E-Commerce Law", and platform operators. You must not be unfairly changed by unilaterally changing the agreement and substantially Case 3, the first consumer, due to the retrieval of the service, the judicial review of the e-commerce platform, the judicial review of discrimination, the case, which determines the functional positioning of the e-commerce platform when reviewing the algorithm of the e-commerce platform retrieval service. And the development phase of the artificial intelligence, and the e-commerce platform should be lower than the search engine.

At the same time, there is a certain business self-ownership in the e-commerce platform in providing retrieval services. In a case trial, it is necessary to consider the dependence of the consumer to strictly review the rationality of the retrieval algorithm, but also fully respect the independent management rights of the e-commerce platform. Case 4, abuse seven days no reason rules return cargo case – Platform The format of the user’s suspension of users is effective "Seven days no reason to return system" gives consumers return rights, but does not mean that it can abuse this right. Consumers violate the return behavior of honesty credit principles, constitutes the right to abuse, and the platform has the right to make management measures to abuse the rights according to the platform rules under the premise of non-violation of laws and regulations.

Case 5, "The First Part of the First Person" crash case – Live platform security obligations can expand the security of tangible physical space to intangible network space, apply network infringement responsibility to determine network service providers Safety protection obligations, still controversial.

However, the network space is not a legal place, and the necessary regulations should be performed. In the case where the principle of fault liability in Article 6 of the Application Responsibility Law can be responsible for responsibility, it is not necessary to expand the scope of application of Article 37 of the Interpretation of Responsibility Law. Case 6. Same industry competitors malicious complaints – The identification of intellectual property malicious complaints This case is the dispute caused by the damage caused by the operator in the platform. From the main body of the complaint behavior, the rights and credentials, after receiving the plaintiff’s letter, it refuses to withdraw the complaint and other behaviors, and the defendant is incorrectly notified, and it is subjectively fault. In terms of property losses, this case considers the loss of access flow generated by platform penalties. The user’s viscosity is weakened, and the loss of intangible assets such as downgrades, and the expenditures produced by the restoration of the original state.

In addition, it is also necessary to consider whether the profit can be produced during the online store, and the profit loss does not have certain determinism and predictability. Case 7. The first case involved in platform data rights identified unfair competition case – platform operators enjoy the overall rights data resource system platform operators invested a lot of manpower and material, and after long-term operating accumulation, this data Resources can bring commercial interests and competitive advantages for platform operators, and platform operators should enjoy data rights to platform data resources, and the behavior of destructive use of this data resource is unfair competition.

Case 8. "Shared Account" Unfair Competitive Disputes – Platform Account Division Rental Composed of Unfair Competition This case is the first response to the increasingly common "shared account" behavior.

The case has gave a negative evaluation on the behavior of "legal use" and a member account account. It belongs to itself, not proper, belongs to improper competition. Case 9. Law’s Ph.D. is short video platform case – platform operators should collect reasonably, using personal information, the case shows that under the Internet era, the privacy of natural persons and personal information rights protection and platform use between big data. Tension relationship.

With the development and technology of the Internet industry, the network scenes are different, the useful technology and product operation logic are different, and the nature of behavior may be different, and it is necessary to carefully analyze and judgment according to specific scenes.

The judgment ideas of the court have emphasized the prudent and substantially judge whether to constitute a violation of personal information rights and interests. Under the premise of protecting personal information rights, the compliance of large data utilization, emphasizing the information subject to the lack of personal information control while also reflecting The necessity of designing product models and development technology applications from the perspective of the protection of information main body rights.

Case 10, Gucci belt truth – the legitimacy of cross-border e-commerce retail import commodities, the court according to the overseas purchase process and related credentials provided by the cross-border e-commerce platform, import goods declaration form, intellectual property filing information, etc. Certificate The goods have legal sources in the case of the case, and the identification case is legal, affirmed the legality of cross-border e-commerce retail import goods. The case is of great significance to standardize cross-border e-commerce behavior, and also suggesting that e-commerce operators should follow the laws and regulations of import and export supervision and management in accordance with Article 26 of the E-Commerce Law, ensuring the legality and traceability of the product. .

(Editor: Luo Zhi Zhi, Gao Lei) Sharing let more people see recommendation reading.