网络服务商不作为刑事责任的边界

The Border of Crime of Omission Committed by the Internet Service Provider

除了法律、行政法规的明确规定,先行行为可以成为网络服务商作为义务的来源。技术中立不能成为免责事由,刑事违法性判断的关键在于,网络服务商是否实施了可期待的作为,以及客观上该作为是否具有规避法益侵害结果发生的可能性。《刑法修正案(九)》增设的帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪与拒不履行信息网络安全管理罪,存在法定刑设置不合理、前置法缺位制约罪名适用等问题,立法效果仍待实践检验。

In addition to the provisions of laws and administrative regulations, antecedent acts can be a source of obligation of the ISP （ internet service provider）. Technology neutrality cannot be exemptions. The key of judging illegality is whether the ISP fulfils obligations that can be expected, and whether this behavior can prevent the occurrence of harmful results. In terms of the crime of offering assistance for cybercrime and the crime of refusing to fulfil obligations of network security management provided by Criminal Law Amendment （ix） , there are problems such as unreasonable punishment and the lack of pre-law. Therefor the effect of legislation still needs to be examined in practice.