法律运作中的权利话语--中国网约车案与美国的Uber案、Airbnb案比较研究  

Right Discourse during Operation of Law

作　　者：许娟[1] Xu Juan

机构地区：[1]上海对外经贸大学法学院

出　　处：《复印报刊资料（法理学、法史学）》2017年第6期26-35,共10页JURISPRUDENCE AND HISTORY OF LAW

基　　金：国家社科基金一般项目《少数民族乡约的文化创新研究》(课题编号12BMZ039)的资助。

摘　　要：权利话语不是一套概念系统,而是一套陈述系统。在法律运作中,权利话语应当在提升国家能力基础上,回应经济发展的需要,进行社会实证分析。本文以美国近期发生的Airbnb网络运营商短租遭禁起诉纽约州政府为切入点,并对比研究波斯纳法官判决支持Uber网约车行业一案以及中国互联网专车第一案。尽管在不同案件中权利话语有差异,但是互联网新业态中的权利话语共性很明显,即自由竞争权利优于监管权力。由于互联网与技术自由、创新能力深度纠缠,互联网新业态模式与一般业态模式下的权利话语必然有所不同。不能根据“关系权利话语”、“政治异化”、“道德考量”来展开权利话语,应当利用“自由权”、“绩效合法性”、“国家能力”展开互联网新业态的权利话语。Right discourse is not a set of concept system,but rather a statement system.In the operation of law,the right discourse should correspond to the needs of economic development on the basis of enhancing national capacity,carrying out social empirical analysis.In this paper,the recent airbnb network operators in the United States banned to prosecute short-term rent for the New York state government,compared to Judge Posner's decision to support Uber network car industry case,as well as China's first internet car.Although there are differences in right discourse in different cases,the common discourse of right in the new internet format is obvious,that is,the right of free competition is better than the right of supervision.Due to the internet and technical freedom,innovation,deep entanglement,the new internet format and the general format of the right discourse must be different.The right discourse should not be carried out according to the relationship between right discourse,political alienation and moral consideration,and we should use the right of freedom,legitimacy of performance and nation's capacity to start the right discourse of the new internet format.

关 键 词：互联网 新业态权利 话语自由主义 实用主义绩效 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]