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.     

The effect of institutional support and relational capital on knowledge mobilization in public administration research

Knowledge mobilization (KMb) takes a programmatic approach to empower and motivate scholars to connect research with policy-making through disseminating research to knowledge users, acquiring information from practitioners, and responding to the acquired information. The present study aims to investigate the influence of institutional-level factors on researchers' KMb activities. One hundred fifty-five researchers in the field of public administration across China participated in an online survey study. The participants reported their KMb activities, perceived institutional support, and relational capital. The results demonstrate that both the strength of institutional support and relational capital are positively associated with researchers' KMb activities. Moreover, the effect of institutional support tends to be stronger when an institution has more relational capital. The study highlights that research institutions should take programmatic approaches to empower their researchers to be actively involved in the knowledge co-production process and make a systematic effort at the institutional level to build a well-developed collaborative network.     

论商业秘密的价值性

在当代,商业秘密的法律保护问题日益重要。进入二十一世纪后,世界上各主要国家的立法及一些国际性的公约都对商业秘密的定义做出了规定。本文试图在考察其他国家立法及Trips协议的基础上,对商业秘密的价值性进行探讨,进而探讨商业秘密价值性的确定问题,主张取消我国法律中的实用性的规定,以期完善我国商业秘密保护立法。     

关于监管工作科学化问题的思考

近年来，全国监狱系统重特大监管安全事故时有发生，特别是2009年10月17日内蒙古第二监狱发生的罪犯杀害警察集体越狱脱逃事故引起国内媒体的广泛关注和全社会的强烈反响。对此，各级领导都非常重视，司法部于2009年10月19日向全国监狱系统发出了《关于进一步加强监所管理确保安全稳定》的紧急通知，从安全认识、隐患排查、制度和责任落实以及加强领导等五个方面提出了要求。     

浙江省流动人口青少年违法犯罪特点及其对策

浙江省流动人口青少年违法犯罪数量及比重均呈上升态势,以侵财型为主,但违法犯罪的种类、领域有多元化趋势,违法犯罪主体以初中及以下文化程度为绝大多数,暴力性突出,地域化特点显著,动机多样化,侵害对象以流动人口为主等特点。预防流动人口青少年违法犯罪,主要应正确评估流动人口地位、作用,逐步健全预防治理流动人口青少年违法犯罪的体系,以《流动人口管理法》将流动人口管理纳入法治轨道,增加流动人口与流入地居民间的亲合感,减少流动人口青少年因受歧视而形成的对立、仇视情绪,开放教育资源,预防流动人口青少年因就学、就业困难而诱发违法犯罪,实施农民工最低工资限制,开展法律援助,减少流动人口青少年合法权益受侵害后产生的报复性违法犯罪,建立问题流动人口青少年帮教、挽救组织。     

中国南海历史性权利探析——以中菲南海仲裁案为视角

中国如何在南海主张不受《海洋法公约》调整的历史性权利,同时又受《公约》尊重,这是一大难题。造成这一困局的原因是中国南海权利主张本身存在两个缺陷:第一,试图以单一的历史性权利规则主张涵盖整个南海海域的权利,未能解决与《海洋法公约》相关条款的冲突。第二,以《海洋法公约》之外的法源主张区别于《公约》的历史性权利,但海洋权利内容又是《公约》框架内的事项,由此又落入《公约》的调整范围。对历史性权利的法源、性质和内容的阐明是中国南海权利主张的症结所在,只有对此作出有别于《公约》权利的主张,才能落入《公约》序言"未予以规定的事项,应继续以一般国际法的规则和原则为准据"的条款中,以此排除《公约》的适用。本文试图对历史性权利做全面解读,以此证实历史性权利是区别于《公约》权利的体系,不受《公约》调整;其次,试图处理历史性权利与《公约》权利的并存关系,以此证实历史性权利受《公约》尊重。     

论中国外资优惠政策的调整

改革开放以来,外国直接投资在中国呈现出迅猛增长的总态势,成为促进我国技术进步和经济增长的重要推动器.随着国际经济环境和国内经济形势的变化,中国外资优惠政策中不利于外资有效利用和本国经济发展的弊端已有显现,有必要重新审视中国的外资优惠政策,进行有益的调整和完善.中国外资优惠政策调整的方向应当是按技术、资源环境、地域等标准给予相应优惠,由政策引资向市场引资和环境引资转变.     

基于产业识别的贵州省工业产业结构实证研究

贵州省推动"工业强省"战略的过程中,识别工业产业及构建合理工业产业结构是正在解决的重大课题。文章以贵州省2010-2012年工业各产业产值及增长率为特征量,建立符合贵州省省情的工业产业识别模型,并对贵州省工业结构进行实证分析,认为工业产业结构可以划分为四个层次:主导产业、支柱产业、潜导产业、滞后产业,提出相应对策,促进贵州省工业经济发展。     

入世后中国政府职能转变的思路选择

近年来,中国政府的职能转变虽有进展,但在许多方面还有不符合WTO规则要求的地方。为适应已经加入WTO的形势需要,中国必须按照WTO规则要求,进一步理顺政府与企业、政府与市场、政府与社会的关系,实现政府职能的根本性转变。