论文部分内容阅读
对于知识产权网络侵权案件中公证证据的认定,一直存在两种认识,一种要求倾向于保护权利人,即使证据存在一定的缺陷,也不能对权利人要求过高;另一种则认为网络证据很容易作假,因此应当对网络取证的程序和步骤进行严格限制。本文作者从计算机网络技术和法律适用技术两个方面出发,认为人民法院处理民事案件所追求的公平,不能仅限于个案效力,而应当通过个案的审理发挥法律的指引功能,个案的公平应当与社会总体上的利益公平联系起来;法官在决定证据的取舍和效力时,应当综合考虑该证据所处的人文背景,对网络公证取证而言,同样不能脱离网络的特点,对于公证取证施以必要的严格要求更有意义。
There are two kinds of cognition for the determination of notarized evidence in the infringement cases of intellectual property network. One kind of requirement tends to protect the right people even if there is some flaws in the evidence and can not over-claim the right people. Another is that the network evidence It is easy to make a fake, so network forensics procedures and procedures should be strictly limited. The author of this paper, starting from computer network technology and applicable law, thinks that the people’s court should not only be limited to the effectiveness of cases, but should also play the guiding role of the law through trial of individual cases. The fairness of individual cases should be in line with the social The fairness of the overall interests of the judge; judges in determining the trade-offs and effectiveness of evidence should be taken into account the humane background of the evidence in the network of notarized evidence, the same can not be separated from the network for notarized evidence necessary Strict requirements more meaningful.