法经济学视角下搜索关键词隐性使用的正当性分析  

Legitimacy Analysis of Implicit Uses of Search Keyword from the Perspective of Law and Economics

作　　者：郑金涛 Zheng Jintao

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院,北京100089

出　　处：《南海法学》2024年第4期34-45,共12页The South China Sea Law Journal

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目“互联网交易制度与民事权利保护研究”(项目编号:20&ZD192)。

摘　　要：隐性使用构成不正当竞争之观点存在道德评判之价值偏颇与循环论证之逻辑弊病,并不可取。隐性使用是造成负外部性的搭便车行为因而引致法律介入的必要性之主张是对外部性理论的误用,并不成立。隐性使用造成的竞争损害(若有)是中性的,在适用反不正当竞争法一般条款判断隐性使用是否构成不正当竞争时,应在损害相互性视角下关注其社会成本-收益结构,以其对“经营者利益、消费者利益和市场竞争秩序”的净效应作为终极评价标准。这要求法院根据个案特定情境进行客观、全面的经济分析。除了少数特殊情形,如今隐性使用对原告经营者利益的负面影响有限,但可为被告经营者和消费者带来实质利益,并促进有效率的市场竞争秩序,故一般不宜认定为不正当竞争。The view that implicit uses constitute unfair competition is characterized by the value bias of moral judgment and the logical drawback of circular argumentation,which cannot stand on feet.The claim that implicit uses is free-riding that creates negative externalities and thus gives rise to the need for legal intervention is a misapplication of the theory of externalities and is not valid.Competitive harm caused by implicit uses,if any,is neutral.When applying Article 2 of Anti-Unfair Competition Law of PRC to determine whether implicit uses constitute unfair competition,it should focus on their social cost-benefit structure under the perspective of reciprocity of harms,i.e.,taking as the ultimate evaluation standard their net effect on“the interests of businesses,the interests of consumers and the order of market competition”as a whole.This requires the court to conduct an objective and comprehensive economic analysis based on each case’s particular circumstances.At present,with the exception of a few special cases,implicit uses have a limited negative impact on the interests of the plaintiff businesses,but can bring substantial benefits to the defendant businesses and consumers and promote an efficient order of market competition,and thus generally shall not constitute unfair competition.

关 键 词：隐性使用 搭便车 搜索关键词 竞价排名 不正当竞争 损害相互性 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]