本文選題：致害詆毀 + 誹謗�。� 參考：《河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)》2014年03期

【摘要】：產(chǎn)權(quán)誹謗和商品貶損是致害詆毀侵權(quán)的常見(jiàn)形式。致害詆毀侵權(quán)與誹謗侵權(quán)有共性也有差異。致害詆毀行為的本質(zhì)是對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)關(guān)系的非法干擾,其規(guī)則保護(hù)的對(duì)象是第三人與被侵權(quán)人的經(jīng)濟(jì)關(guān)系,維護(hù)良好的市場(chǎng)交易秩序是其價(jià)值追求。致害詆毀侵權(quán)與誹謗侵權(quán)有著不同的歷史淵源,憲法規(guī)則對(duì)普通法誹謗侵權(quán)規(guī)則的修正不會(huì)根本性地消弭兩者的差別。作為一種經(jīng)濟(jì)損害侵權(quán)的致害詆毀侵權(quán)具有獨(dú)特的理論和實(shí)踐價(jià)值。
[Abstract]:Defamation of property rights and derogatory goods are common forms of injurious libel infringement. There are similarities and differences between slander infringement and slander infringement. The essence of injurious and defamatory behavior is illegal interference to economic relations, the object of its rule protection is the economic relationship between the third party and the infringed party, and the value pursuit is to maintain a good market transaction order. There are different historical origins between injurious defamation tort and libel tort. The amendment of constitutional rules to common law libel tort rules will not fundamentally eliminate the difference between them. As a kind of economic damage tort, injurious defamation infringement has unique theoretical and practical value.
【作者單位】： 中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院法學(xué)研究所;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923;D971.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 王崇華;;美國(guó)致害詆毀侵權(quán)與誹謗侵權(quán)之比較[J];河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2014年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：2009887