社交网络背景下大学生思想政治教育的挑战与因应

随着信息技术的迅猛发展,微博微信等新兴社交网络媒体,已受到越来越多在校大学生的青睐。社交网络以用户为中心,私人空间和公共空间融合,虚拟与真实融合的特性,不断冲击着当代大学生的基本道德素质、人格素养、人际交往等行为。将思想政治教育在网络中的理念予以创新,并且对思想政治教育的内容等应对措施予以革新,对树立大学生正确应用社交网络观念有关键性的作用,文章试通过加强大学生正确使用社交网络的监督管理,使其在实践中能够对大学生塑造积极、健康、正确的思想起到推波助澜的作用。     

网络文化背景下大学生党员心理健康教育探析

本文对目前大学生党员在网络文化背景下普遍存在的突出错误心理倾向进行深入研究与分析,探讨在网络文化背景的新形势下如何培养大学生党员健康的网络心理教育对策,使大学生党员在网络世界和现实世界中都朝着健康、积极、向上的方面发展。     

有效利用网络开展大学生思想政治教育探析

随着信息科学技术的快速发展,人类社会进入了信息网络时代,网络正在日益渗透到我们日常生活中的各个方面,影响着大学生的学习生活、思维方式、价值观念。思想政治教育应适应网络时代的发展,不断改进大学生思想政治教育工作的方式和手段;加强网络思想政治教育工作队伍建设与管理,培养和建设一支适应网络时代要求的大学生思想政治教育工作者队伍;重视大学生的自我教育,开拓创新,注重网站教育内容的实效性;加强网络管理法规及制度建设,规范网络行为;努力开发大学生思想政治教育工作软件,更好地保证大学生思想政治教育工作作用的有效发挥。     

从心理健康教育视角探讨大学生自我同一性的确立

高校心理健康教育工作者应从重视大学生的自我意识教育、重视大学生的社会实践活动、加强心理辅导工作和提供社会支持这四个方面来积极关注大学生自我同一性的建立,帮助他们形成健康的人格。     

浅谈互联网对大学生思想道德教育的影响及对策

网络冲击着大学生的学习生活,更是影响到大学生的精神思想.网络犹如一把"双刃剑",在给人们带来新知识、新信息的同时,也给高校的德育工作者带来了极大的挑战.如何因势利导,剔除糟粕使网络成为培养新时代德、智、体全面发展的大学生的有效工具是新时期大学生思想道德教育的重点内容.本文指出应加强网络德育,指引大学生树立正确健康的网络心态,以科学的思想武装自己,抵御网络上的种种诱惑,促进自身的健康成长.     

大学生网络法治意识教育的问题与路径探析

当前,大学生网络法治意识不容乐观,大学生网络法治意识教育还存在法治教育课程中网络法治教育的内容有所缺失、法治生活中大学生的法治体验不够完整、法治教育活动的效果难以保证等问题。文章认为培育大学生网络法治意识,需要社会各方共同努力,通过优化网络法治课程和教学内容,构建健康有序的法治生活,推动网络法治教育活动见实效。     

论网络环境下大学生的思想政治教育与管理的融合

当代社会网络技术的发展日新月并,校园网络建设速度也逐渐加快。互联网的出现为我们的教育发展注入了新的活力,改变了大学生的学习和生活方式,也给大学生思想政治教育与管理带来了新的方向。因此,加强网络环境下大学生思想政治教育势在必行。     

高校应如何加强大学生网络道德法制教育

现实生活中,大学生网络行为失德、违法现象严重,迫切要求高校加强大学生网络道德和法制教育。本文分析了大学生网络行为失德、违法现象严重的原因,提出了对大学生网络道德、法制教育中应当贯彻的基本原则,探讨了高校加强大学生网络道德法制教育的内容和方法。     

社交网络对大学生的影响——以广州高校社交网络使用情况为调研主体

社交网络对大学生产生网络依赖、性格孤僻等消极影响,这是由于大学生网络人际关系存在隐蔽性与匿名性等特点.大学生应该通过学习人际交往道德规范,增强自我约束能力,从而进行健康的网络社交,做正确的“社交网络人”.     

论高校网络思想政治教育的建设

随着信息网络技术的迅猛发展和在整个社会领域内的广泛运用,人类正进入信息网络时代。而高校大学生已成为网络最大的用户群体,网络深刻地影响着大学生的世界观、人生观、价值观。网络既为大学生的思想政治教育开辟了新领域,提供了新手段,又使之面临严峻的考验和挑战。要想真正地增强大学生思想政治教育的实效,必须运用各种途径加强高校网络思想政治教育的建设。     

A psychometric comparison of internet and non-internet sex offenders from a community treatment sample

Abstract

This paper compares psychometric test assessments of 39 men convicted of internet sex offences with 39 convicted of contact offences against a specific victim. Higher rates of socially desirable responding were identified in the internet group, as well as higher rates of emotional loneliness and under assertiveness, although the latter two findings were not statistically significant. This group also achieved lower scores measuring external locus of control, which might reflect their generally higher levels of education and employment (identified from research carried out in tandem with this work). The internet group achieved lower scores on sexualized attitudes towards children, emotional congruence with children and empathy distortions with regard to victims of child abuse. Hence, although they exhibited the kinds of general personality problems exhibited by other sex offenders, they did not support attitudes that explicitly endorse or condone the sexual abuse of children. This paper presents some hypotheses about these results and identifies further research necessary to develop understanding about this new kind of sexually abusive behaviour.     

SPACE AS PARADIGM OF INTERNET REGULATION

Right now internet regulation is standing at the crossroads. Its problem-driven evolution has led to a conglomerate of seemingly diverse rules, which can hardly be structured as one cohesive area of law. Nevertheless, a consolidation of these rules as one cross-sectional field of law is can be identified. The discussion about the terms “internet regulation” and “internet governance” as well as recent developments in this field indicate that a paradigm shift in internet regulation is ongoing. Whereas self-regulation has been the determining mode of internet governance for a long time, internet regulation in the sense of public regulation is currently gaining more influence. This transformation is accompanied by the rising importance of a traditional paradigm of law: the idea of space. Even though the idea of space finds itself challenged with regard to the internet, it can give substance to many different aspects of internet regulation.     

论网络发表权

网络发表权是指作者决定是否将其作品通过网络公之于众的权利,所反映的是一种待实现状态,也可以理解为是权利人依法享有的一种静态性权利;而网络传输权是指著作权及相关权利人享有以有线或者无线方式向公众提供作品,使公众可以在其个人选定的时间和地点获得作品的权利,其反映的是作者实现发表权的现实状态。我们有必要正确区分性质不同的这两项权利,从而为作者在网络环境下发表权的保护提出相应的理论依据。     

MAPPING PARADIGMS OF EUROPEAN INTERNET REGULATION: THE EXAMPLE OF INTERNET CONTENT CONTROL

The article introduces three of the paradigms used to analyze internet regulation and applies them to the history of internet content control in Europe. It builds on Thomas Kuhn’s notion of paradigms and previous works on regulatory theory, defining regulatory paradigms as a “shared understanding of the purpose of regulation, of the way of thinking about how regulation works, and of the set of institutional arrangements and instruments through which regulation is conducted.” Building on this definition, the prevalent concepts of the paradigms of internet regulation refer to the intention, mechanisms, and the intensity of regulation. The article discusses these concepts with regard to the regulation of internet content control in Europe and analyzes three paradigm shifts that have taken place since the early days of the internet. These paradigm shifts concern the responsiveness, differentiation, and intensity of regulation.     

Analyzing approaches to internet jurisdiction based on a model of harbors and the high seas

The inherent cross-border nature of the internet has challenged the legal system for over two decades. In this paper we introduce a model in which the internet is approached as if it were the high seas, the harbor of origin, the harbor of destination, or a combination of these. This model is used to rephrase existing case law related to internet jurisdiction from an international law perspective, the US and the EU (in particular Germany and the Netherlands). The model helps to illuminate the positions taken by the parties and the judge, and to indicate possible alternative interpretations. In some cases a high seas approach would have made sense (Yahoo!), or more recently the Vacation Rental by Owner case about trademarks where registration in one country was deemed to have an effect everywhere a person had the trademark on his or her computer screen. In H&M v G-star the Dutch Supreme Court even established jurisdiction based on an infringing product that was not available in the city of the court but was to become available on the internet some time in the future. We do not take a position in this paper on what perspective, based on our model, is best, but make clear how to identify the possible arguments.     

论网上侵权纠纷当事人的确定

随着互联网的发展和广泛应用,网上侵权纠纷也大量发生。由于网上侵权纠纷当事人具有虚拟性、匿名性、隐蔽性、全球性和广泛性等特征,查找侵权人和查明当事人的真实身份往往存在着极大的困难,给当事人的确定带来了巨大的挑战。对于网上侵权纠纷的当事人,可以通过网页、账户密码、用户注册资料、IP地址、第三方证明、电子签名、暗记等方法来进行查找和确定。虽然网上侵权行为的实施均需借助网络服务提供者提供的网络服务,但不能一刀切地将网络服务提供者列为被告并追究其侵权责任,而应根据其提供服务的性质、是否存在过错等具体情形来确定网络服务提供者的诉讼地位。     

美国网上证券交易监管机制及其启示

网上证券交易是伴随计算机网络技术被引入证券市场而发展起来的新兴证券交易方式，随着其在世界各国证券市场的广泛应用，对网上证券交易的监管也成为各国监管机构越来越需要重视的问题之一。美国是最早发展网上证券交易的国家，其对网上证券交易的监管机制相对比较完善和有效，其推出的一些监管措施经过一些国际组织的推荐为世界其他国家所效仿，取得了比较好的效果。本文在探究美国的网上证券交易监管机制的基础上，结合中国的实际，就中国的网上证券交易监管的发展提出了建议，以期对建立健全中国的网上证券交易监管机制有所帮助。     

网上银行的安全保障义务研究

近年来网上银行业务发展迅速,但有关网上银行客户账户资金被盗的事件也层出不穷。由于法律法规的滞后性和相关法律制度的欠缺,在已有的大量判决中,客户的利益未能得到公平地对待和保护,最终也必将影响网上银行业的长远发展。适用相关司法解释关于安全保障义务的规定,由网上银行对客户承担安全保障义务,能较好地解决网上银行的安全性问题,并平衡网上银行和客户间的利益。     

INTERNET INTERMEDIARIES’ LIABILITY FOR ONLINE ILLEGAL HATE SPEECH

Considering the prevalence of online hate speech and its harm and risks to the targeted people, democratic discourse and public security, it is necessary to combat online hate speech. For this purpose, internet intermediaries play a crucial role as new governors of online speech. However, there is no universal definition of hate speech. Rules concerning this vary in different countries depending on their social, ethical, legal and religious backgrounds. The answer to the question of who can be liable for online hate speech also varies in different countries depending on the social, cultural, history, legal and political backgrounds. The First Amendment, cyberliberalism and the priority of promoting the emerging internet industry lead to the U.S. model, which offers intermediaries wide exemptions from liability for third-party illegal content. Conversely, the Chinese model of cyberpaternalism prefers to control online content on ideological, political and national security grounds through indirect methods, whereas the European Union (EU) and most European countries, including Germany, choose the middle ground to achieve balance between restricting online illegal hate speech and the freedom of speech as well as internet innovation. It is worth noting that there is a heated discussion on whether intermediary liability exemptions are still suitable for the world today, and there is a tendency in the EU to expand intermediary liability by imposing obligation on online platforms to tackle illegal hate speech. However, these reforms are again criticized as they could lead to erosion of the EU legal framework as well as privatization of law enforcement through algorithmic tools. Those critical issues relate to the central questions of whether intermediaries should be liable for user-generated illegal hate speech at all and, if so, how should they fulfill these liabilities? Based on the analysis of the different basic standpoints of cyberliberalists and cyberpaternalists on the internet regulation as well as the arguments of proponents and opponents of the intermediary liability exemptions, especially the debates over factual impracticality and legal restraints, impact on internet innovation and the chilling effect on freedom of speech in the case that intermediaries bear liabilities for illegal third-party content, the paper argues that the arguments for intermediary liability exemptions are not any more tenable or plausible in the web 3.0 era. The outdated intermediary immunity doctrine needs to be reformed and amended. Furthermore, intermediaries are becoming the new governors of online speech and platforms now have the power to curtail online hate speech. Thus, the attention should turn to the appropriate design of legal responsibilities of intermediaries. The possible suggestions could be the following three points: Imposing liability on intermediaries for illegal hate speech requires national law and international human rights norms as the outer boundary; openness, transparency and accountability as internal constraints; balance of multi-interests and involvement of multi-stakeholders in internet governance regime.     

我国互联网内容分级制度研究

保护未成年人健康成长需要净化互联网内容,兼顾成年人的权利,弥补现行法律漏洞,需要建立互联网内容分级法律制度。国际上,德、美、韩三国未成年人互联网保护立法的主要经验是间接监管、减轻企业负担、扩大社会参与、强化行业自治。我国互联网内容分级制度是指为避免未成年人接触互联网不适宜信息,由提供者对互联网内容分类、标签,学校、家庭等过滤,社会监督、评估,政府间接监管的法律规范总和,在立法时应坚持共同治理、最小限制、适当负担、奖惩并用四项原则;应明确分级范围、分级标准和过滤软件;确定七大类主体的权利义务。