English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88613/118155 (75%)
Visitors : 23470981      Online Users : 203
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/124446


    Title: 以比較法觀點規範網路服務提供者於防制性隱私內容外流之責任與義務
    A Comparative Study on Regulating the Liabilities and the Obligations of Internet Service Provider on the Prevention of Non-Consensual Pornography
    Authors: 蕭郁溏
    Contributors: 法學評論
    Keywords: 復仇式色情;違反本人意願散布性隱私內容;隱私權;著作權;網路服務提供者;通知-移除程序;被遺忘權;刪除權;個人資料保護法;數位通訊傳播法草案
    Revenge Porn;Non-Consensual Pornography;Privacy Right;Copyright;Internet Service Provider;Notice-and-Takedown Procedure;The Right to be Forgotten;The Right to Erasure;Personal Information Protection Act;Bill of Digital Communication Act
    Date: 2018-09
    Issue Date: 2019-07-24 16:04:45 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 「違反本人意願散布性隱私內容」之入罪化,近來已成為國際法制之改革重點。然,該如何規範網路服務提供者就此內容之責任與義務,經散布的性隱私內容該如何移除,亦是法制上的難題。被害人最在乎的往往是有否可能主張事前權利保護或事後救濟。由於美國通信端正法和網路著作權侵害責任限制法為許多國家規範網路服務提供者之參考對象,故本文以案例分析探討通信端正法之利與弊,並自隱私權觀點分析被遺忘權與刪除權,再以比較法探究「通知─移除程序」義務之規範,藉此釐清網路服務提供者之責任與義務。最後,以個人資料保護法和數位通訊傳播法草案出發,研析被遺忘權與刪除權於我國適用的可能,檢討我國法制之現況並提出立法建議。
    As we observe progresses in legal reforms, the criminalization of “Non-Consensual Pornography” has recently become one of the core issues therein. However, how the law regulates the liabilities and the obligations of Internet Service Providers on this cybercrime and the removal of non-consensual pornography are both complicated legal issues. Once a person’s sexual content is leaked, such victim would mostly be concerned about whether the participants of the content would be able to claim preemptory rights or pursue legal remedies. Considering that a lot of countries’ regulations of Internet Service Providers are based on the U.S. Communications Decency Act and Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, this paper begins by arguing the pros and cons of the Communications Decency Act by case study; analyzes the right to be forgotten and the right to erasure, addresses “notice-and-takedown” procedure by comparative study; and clarifies the liabilities and the obligations of Internet Service Providers. Lastly, this paper starts from Personal Information Protection Act and the bill of Digital Communication Act, discusses the possibility of the application of the right to be forgotten and the right to erasure, and reflects on the status quo of Taiwan laws to put forward legislative suggestions.
    Relation: 法學評論, 154, 151-237
    Data Type: article
    DOI 連結: https://doi.org/ 10.3966/102398202018090154001
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202018090154003
    Appears in Collections:[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    70.pdf621KbAdobe PDF10View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback