论直播打赏的性质与法律规制方式  

On the Nature of Live Streaming Rewards and Legal Regulation Approach

作　　者：范明志 杨阳[1] FAN Ming-zhi;YANG Yang

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学数据法治研究院,北京100080

出　　处：《求是学刊》2024年第5期131-142,共12页Seeking Truth

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目“互联网平台的社会影响及治理路径研究”(21&ZD195);国家社科基金重点项目“自动化行政算法决策的法律控制”(21AFX004)。

摘　　要：对于直播打赏的定性,赠予合同说、服务合同说以及无合同关系说均存在无法解释的问题。直播打赏虽然具有财产行为属性,但其决定性因素是用户具有强烈情绪性的情感,不应当将这种情感作为理性经济人的真实意思表示并以此为基础将直播打赏定性为法律行为。直播打赏因当事人意思表示真实性难以确定而应当归入事实行为。直播打赏的主体资格与价值限额应当成为法律调整直播打赏行为的外延式条件。对于形似而实非的“非真正打赏行为”,应当将其拉回法内空间,按照赠与、服务合同甚至销赃等相应行为的性质由法律进行调整,平台亦应建立直播打赏的自治规则,从而形成调整直播打赏的规则体系。In characterizing the rewards in live streaming,the gift contract theory,the service contract theory,and the non-contractual relationship theory all present unresolved issues.Live streaming rewards,while possessing the attributes of property behavior,are primarily driven by users' strong emotional responses.These emotions should not be considered as the true intentions of a rational economic agent,and thus,live streaming rewards should not be characterized as legal acts based on such emotional expressions.Live streaming reward should be classified as a factual act because the authenticity of the party's meaning is difficult to determine.The subjective qualification and value limit of the live reward should become the legal adjustment of the live reward behaviour of the external conditions.For the seemingly but not real “non-genuine reward behaviour”,it should be brought back within the legal space,and adjusted by law according to the nature of the behavior,such as gift,service contracts,or even receiving stolen goods.The platform should also establish the autonomy of the live streaming reward rules,so as to adjust the live streaming reward system of regulation.

关 键 词：直播打赏 情感行为 事实行为 平台自治 法律规制 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学] D924.1[政治法律—法学]