【作者】 张世鹏；

【导师】 江平；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 商业广告在现代社会中对于社会大众的资讯功能巨大,有作为言论自由保护的必要,但是虚假商业广告的泛滥也损害了广告受众的权利(益),需要民法予以介入。明确界定广告与虚假广告的概念、确立虚假广告认定标准是民法介入虚假广告的前提。各国关于虚假广告的法制为体现现代消费社会和信息社会的特征,在虚假广告的界定上采用“引人错误”为虚假广告的唯一本质特征,在其认定上也采有利于消费者的原则。现代民法介入虚假广告的路径是逐渐改变传统民法认为广告是一种没有包含当事人的法律效果意思表示观念,塑造了对于虚假广告受害者的两种救济模式:契约责任与侵权责任。另外针对虚假广告的特征,现代民法规定的虚假广告责任主体由广告主扩大到广告经营者、广告发布者和广告推荐者。现代民法对于虚假广告契约责任的塑造是通过放弃传统民法中广告仅作为要约邀请的学说,将广告解释为要约或担保,从而成为契约的内容,虚假广告的直接后果就是承担契约责任。针对广告的受众不确定的特征,契约法也在扩大保护的范围,一定程度上突破了契约的相对性原则。我国的合同法在进行这样的转变。传统民法中只有在虚假广告构成欺诈时才追究其侵权责任。法律为保护消费者规定了禁止虚假广告以后,侵权法即以违反保护他人的法律的追究虚假广告的侵权责任。而新近各国、地区的立法中,虚假广告侵权责任的保护的对象扩大到所有的广告受众,广告主不仅要证明广告的真实性,而且对其侵权过错实行推定。另外,最新的立法还明确规定广告责任主体的连带责任。现代民法用以追究虚假广告民事责任的契约责任与侵权责任两种模式各有利弊,前者便捷但受制于契约的相对性原则,后者没有前者的弊端但求偿繁琐,不过这种弊端可以通过修改虚假广告侵权责任的构成得到弥补。更多还原

【Abstract】 Freedom of advertising, as a kind of freedom of speech, is protected by constitution since it is very important for the public accessing to information. But the spread of false advertising has undermined the rights and interests of the public. As a result, it is necessary for civil-law to intervene.The premise of civil-law’intervention in false advertising is well-defined concept of false advertising and well- established standards for judgment. In accordance with the needs of modern society of consumption and information, the various legislations of states and areas define the "misleading" as the only essential character of false advertising in favor of the public.Modern civil-law is gradually moving to recognize advertising’s legal effects. Modern civil-law established two kinds of remedies for false advertising: contract duty and tort liability. Originally, advertiser is the only legal subject to be responsible for the advertisement. Nowadays, advertiser, business, promulgator and endorser of advertising should take responsibility for false advertising in modern civil-law, which consists with the common behavior of most modern advertising.Modern civil-law prescribes advertising contractual duty by regarding advertising as an offer or a warranty; contrarily, traditional civil-law thinks that advertising was invitation of offer. Due to extensive audience of advertising, the modern contract law breaks the privity of contract and expands its scope of protection. There is tort liability in traditional civil-law when the false advertising constitutes deceit. After the prohibition against false advertising in consumer law, tort law adopted new rules aimed to protect others in false advertising. The recent legislations of false advertising in states or areas are more different. Except general consumer, some provisions expand to protect the public; the advertiser has to bear the responsibility to prove the truth of advertising; meanwhile, assumption of the advertisers’fault has been adopted. In addition, some provisions also definitely set the joint and several liabilities.Both contract duty and tort liability are designed to recovering the damage of the public for false advertising in modern civil-law, but the pros and cons of them are different. The former is more convenient but restricted by the privity of contract. There is more trouble in recovering the damage for the public through the latter, but it could be improved by changing the constitute of tort lialibity of false advertising.更多还原