本文關(guān)鍵詞：競價(jià)排名糾紛案例分析　出處：《揚(yáng)州大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 搜索引擎 競價(jià)排名 商標(biāo)侵權(quán) 廣告違法

【摘要】：網(wǎng)絡(luò)時(shí)代的到來,使得互聯(lián)網(wǎng)成為人們搜索和獲取信息資源的主要途徑之一。如此巨大的商業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)面前,基于搜索引擎技術(shù)的競價(jià)排名服務(wù)也應(yīng)運(yùn)而生。但是因?yàn)椤按蟊娫V百度”案和“港益訴谷歌”案的發(fā)生,競價(jià)排名這一新興的網(wǎng)絡(luò)營銷模式也引起了司法實(shí)務(wù)界和理論界的關(guān)注。對于搜索引擎商而言,競價(jià)排名在給其帶來巨額利潤的同時(shí),也使搜索引擎商面臨巨大的法律風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。本文從“大眾訴百度”案和“港益訴谷歌”案兩個(gè)典型案例入手,對競價(jià)排名服務(wù)過程中的一系列法律問題進(jìn)行分析,通過比較國內(nèi)外的相關(guān)立法,提出相應(yīng)的法律建議。 競價(jià)排名是網(wǎng)絡(luò)搜索引擎運(yùn)營商的主要盈利模式。在競價(jià)排名服務(wù)過程中存在著許多法律問題,從競買商家用戶的角度來看,用戶設(shè)置的關(guān)鍵詞可能侵犯權(quán)利人的商標(biāo)權(quán)；就搜索引擎商來說,如果其在競價(jià)排名服務(wù)過程中為用戶提供幫助和便利就可能構(gòu)成間接侵權(quán),要承擔(dān)侵權(quán)責(zé)任。競價(jià)排名實(shí)質(zhì)上應(yīng)該是一種廣告,因此,在競價(jià)排名過程中還可能存在著虛假廣告、不正當(dāng)競爭等一系列的廣告違法問題。由于現(xiàn)行的法律法規(guī)難以對競價(jià)排名中的法律問題做出合理的定位,在司法實(shí)務(wù)中已顯得力不從心。所以對現(xiàn)行法律作出合理的修改和制定專門的法律法規(guī)顯得十分的必要。本文針對上述競價(jià)排名中出現(xiàn)的問題,提出自己的意見和建議,期望通過法律對競價(jià)排名作出更好的規(guī)制,平衡各方利益,維護(hù)正常的市場經(jīng)濟(jì)秩序。
[Abstract]:The advent of the Internet era, the Internet has become one of the main ways for people to search and access to information resources. In front of such a huge business opportunity, search engine technology based on PPC services have emerged. But because "people v. Baidu" case and "Hong Yi v. Google" case, ranking the emerging network marketing model also has caused the judicial practice and theoretical circles. The search engine business, PPC to bring huge profits to them at the same time, also make the search engine business facing a huge legal risk. With two typical cases from the "mass v. Baidu" case and "Gangyi v. Google" case of a series of legal issues PPC service in the process of analysis, through the relevant legislation at home and abroad, put forward the corresponding legal advice.
PPC is the main profit model of Internet search engine operators. In the competitive ranking service process has many legal problems, for businesses from the user's perspective, keyword set by the user may infringe the trademark rights of others.; search engine business, if the competitive ranking service process for users to help and convenience may constitute indirect infringement, should bear tort liability. PPC essence should be a kind of advertising, therefore, in the bidding process may also exist false advertising, unfair competition among a series of illegal advertisement. Due to the existing laws and regulations to make a reasonable position on legal issues of PPC in the judicial practice has appeared to be inadequate. So the existing laws to make reasonable changes and make special laws and regulations is very necessary. This paper Put forward our own opinions and suggestions on the problems in the above bidding ranking, and expect to make better regulation through the law, to balance the interests of all parties and to maintain the normal market economy order.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：揚(yáng)州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 陳曉俊;;競價(jià)排名商標(biāo)侵權(quán)認(rèn)定的新思路——商標(biāo)間接侵權(quán)原則的應(yīng)用[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2009年04期

2 李劍;;百度“競價(jià)排名”非濫用市場支配地位行為[J];法學(xué);2009年03期

3 袁秀挺;胡宓;;搜索引擎商標(biāo)侵權(quán)及不正當(dāng)競爭的認(rèn)定與責(zé)任承擔(dān)——網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境商標(biāo)間接侵權(quán)“第一案”評(píng)析[J];法學(xué);2009年04期

4 文炯;;搜索引擎之競價(jià)排名研究[J];江西圖書館學(xué)刊;2006年01期

5 黃武雙;;搜索引擎服務(wù)商商標(biāo)侵權(quán)責(zé)任的法理基礎(chǔ)——兼評(píng)“大眾搬場”訴“百度網(wǎng)絡(luò)”商標(biāo)侵權(quán)案[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2008年05期

6 鄧宏光;周園;;搜索引擎商何以侵害商標(biāo)權(quán)?——兼論“谷歌”案和“百度”案[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2008年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 楊瑾;競價(jià)排名法律問題探析[D];中國政法大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：1441485