论“假冒”的性质

本文主要从朵云轩一案引出对假冒行为性质的探讨,针对理论界对假冒行为的两种定性侵犯署名权或侵犯姓名权,以及结合形象权理论,通过从学理上,救济措施,各国立法情况等方面分析,指出假冒行为是侵犯形象权的一种表现,同时它又侵犯权利人的姓名权,构成法理理论上所称的法条竞合,应该由当事人选择诉讼请求起诉.     

名人代言虚假广告的法律规制

近些年,请名人做产品广告或出任企业形象代言人之风盛行。但是,在名人代言的产品或服务广告中存在着违法、虚假内容,而我国相关法律、法规没有明确规定名人在虚假广告中的责任。应通过建立名人代言广告的审查及禁止准入制度;明确其代言虚假广告的法律责任;推进公益诉讼等来进行规制。     

防范和规制虚假司法确认

司法确认制度,是随着诉调衔接机制改革的不断深入而发展起来。在多元化纠纷解决的背景下,其具有重要的理论价值和现实意义。然而在我国司法实践中,申请人的不诚信以及法院对司法确认案件进行形式审查等因素诱发该制度运营的偏差,出现虚假司法确认。在新民事诉讼法修改完善的背景下,通过分析虚假司法确认的发生原因,并从申请人、法院、社会多维度提出对虚假司法确认的防范机制,进而于制度关联间寻求最佳救济方案,最后在重新审视司法确认功能的基础上,将其予以系统定位。     

英美国家诉讼限制令对我国虚假诉讼治理的启示

目前我国虚假诉讼司法治理机制存在规制手段相对单调、惩治机制长效性有限、治理理念局部轻重失衡等问题。为解决前述问题,贯彻宽严相济政策,鉴于法治精神和基本原理的互通性与传导性,英美国家诉讼限制令制度可为我国提供有益参考。“诉讼限制令”本质上是一种必要惩戒与诉讼风险防范化解机制,仅在原自由起诉模式下,“嵌入”法院对诉讼黑名单人员再起诉的必要、合理审查许可要求,其余流程与规则不变,彰显民事诉讼国家干预理念,有助于实现社会公共利益与个人利益、自由起诉与诉讼风险管控之间的协调平衡。诉讼限制令制度本身也存在丰富的适用层级与梯度,在引入我国时应保持与既有惩戒惩罚机制的合理衔接。     

从对俄政策调整看日本周边外交的困境

日俄关系在日本的周边外交中占有重要位置,近年来日本试图通过调整对俄政策彰显外交的自主性,改善周边外交状况,推出了一些新的政策措施。首先,日本建议绕开领土问题,扩大与俄罗斯的经济合作,为两国关系的彻底改善,也为最终解决领土问题奠定基础。其次,提出日俄在争议领土从事"共同经济活动"的建议,旨在与俄罗斯在争议领土进行"共同"开发,获得俄罗斯默认日本对争议领土具有主权权利,以便打开日俄关系的大门。第三,日本试图通过调整对俄政策改善周边关系,维护日本在周边外交中的有利地位。但是,日本的对俄政策依然受到内外因素限制,俄罗斯不会轻易在领土问题上让步,日本国内舆论也不可能支持政府在领土问题上让步,日俄之间也不可能在领土问题上达成共识,日俄之间的经济合作也很难脱离政治环境而有所扩大,特别是在日美同盟的框架下,日俄合作具有局限性,日本的周边外交仍然陷于困境之中。     

未婚怀孕:意外还是计划之内?——流动青年同居者的怀孕意愿与经历研究

未婚怀孕现象在中国呈上升趋势,而且随着未婚同居的兴起,未婚怀孕越来越多地发生在同居伴侣中。本文通过分析来自35位有未婚怀孕经历(自己或伴侣)和30位正面临未婚怀孕风险的两类流动青年男女同居者的深度访谈材料,探讨了流动青年的同居怀孕意愿,以及导致或阻止他们在同居关系中怀孕的因素。研究发现,同居很大程度上增加了流动青年女性意外怀孕的风险,这种风险的增加往往是由于避孕时的疏忽大意和依赖有效程度较低的避孕方式所致,很少是因为缺乏避孕意识和知识。研究还发现,同居怀孕情况的增多部分取决于计划内怀孕的增多,同居关系特征、家庭期待和生育的年龄规范压力是影响怀孕意愿的关键因素,怀孕成为结婚准备过程中的一步,有时甚至是结婚前必要的一步。总之,在流动青年群体中,一种关于同居、怀孕和婚姻的联合决策模式正在形成,尽管这打破了组建家庭的传统顺序,但由婚姻来组织生育行为的社会规范并未被动摇。     

Effect of photoarray exposure duration on eyewitness identification accuracy and processing strategy

In this study all offenders admitted to Icelandic prisons over a one year period were approached and 229 (95%) agreed to co-operate with the study. Twenty-seven (12%) of the 229 subjects claimed to have in the past made a false confession during police interviewing. Women prisoners more commonly claimed to have made a false confession than males. The main motives given for having made the false confession were to protect somebody else (48%) and police pressure or escape from custody (52%). The great majority (78%) of the subjects had never retracted the confession, claiming that they had perceived no point in dong so. Twenty-one (78%) of the subjects were convicted of the offenses to which they had, allegedly, made a false confession. The findings in the present study raise the possibility that within an inquisitorial system false confessions may go relatively undetected by the judiciary and be rarely retracted or disputed.     

Jurors’ reactions to recanted confessions: Do the defendant's personal and dispositional characteristics play a role?

Abstract

Confession evidence presented at trial is extremely damaging to the defense. This study examines the impact of a recanted confession on jurors’ perceptions of a murder case in which the defendant claimed to have falsely confessed due either to an underlying medical condition, a psychological disorder, or the general stress of the interrogation. Also included were an inadmissible confession condition and a no-confession control condition. Results showed that the impact of the confession was mediated in part by the circumstances surrounding it. Although probability-of-commission estimates were as high in all of the conditions involving a confession, conviction rates were marginally higher when the disputed confession involved mental illness or interrogation-induced stress than when there was no confession, yet did not differ when the disputed confession involved a medical disorder or there was no confession. These findings show that not all recanted confessions are treated equally and that people selectively discount confessions depending on biases and beliefs they hold.     

True and false intentions: asking about the past to detect lies about the future

This study is on how to discriminate between true and false intentions, an emerging area within psycholegal research. We argue that asking about the past (the planning phase) might be a promising way to detect lies about the future (intentions). That is, participants who had developed false intentions to mask their criminal intentions were assumed to provide equally long and detailed answers to questions about intentions, compared to participants who told the truth about their intentions. In contrast, we predicted that lying participants would be worse at answering questions about the planning of their stated (false) intentions, compared to participants telling the truth about the planning of their stated (true) intentions. To test our assumptions, we used a newly devised experimental set-up accommodating the main characteristics of intent. Both lying and truth-telling suspects perceived the questions on planning as more unanticipated, and more difficult to answer, compared to the questions about their intentions (future actions). Furthermore, in support of our predictions we found that the truth-telling (vs. lying) suspects' answers to questions on planning were longer and perceived as more detailed and clear, whereas liars' and truth-tellers' answers to questions on intentions were equally long and perceived as equally detailed.     

民事虚假诉讼的法律规制

民事虚假诉讼不仅侵犯了第三人的合法权益,而且损害了审判权威和司法公信力,浪费了司法资源。当前立法机关需要按照渐进性的原则积极推动法律修改和完善,以实现对虚假诉讼的法律规制,特别是对严重虚假诉讼行为的刑法规制。