反不正当竞争法保护客体辩说

Debate on the Protecting Object of Anti-unfair Competition Law

“公平竞争权”一度也曾被作为反不正当竞争法保护客体主流观点大行其道,但随后逐渐偃旗息鼓,取而代之的是反不正当竞争法保护客体“法益论”,不过最新又出现了反不正当竞争法同时保护权利和法益的双重保护客体论的异军突起,值得发人深思。权利概念在反不正当竞争法中的引入其实并不必然会带来权利与法益的二元保护客体的区分,并不意味可以将竞争法重新纳入传统侵权法“抽屉”中僵硬地区分权利和利益侵害并为其设置不同责任构成要件。反不正当竞争法在现代化的过程中与侵权法渐行渐远而更加彰显出竞争制度保护法的特点。基于霍菲尔德、康芒斯对被滥用的权利概念的厘清,目前数字经济不正当竞争行为规制可以清晰揭示反不正当竞争法以不受扭曲的自由竞争的制度保护法益为客体。

“The right to fair competition”was once widely regarded as the mainstream view of protecting objects under the anti⁃unfair competition law,but it gradually faded away and was replaced by the“legal interest theory”of protecting objects.However,the latest emergence of the dual protection of rights and legal interests under the anti⁃unfair competition law is worth pondering.The introduction of the concept of rights in the anti⁃unfair competition law does not necessarily bring about a distinction between the dual protection objects of rights and legal interests,nor does it mean that competition law will be reintroduced into the traditional“drawer”of tort law to rigidly distinguish between rights and interests infringement and set different elements of liability composition.The anti⁃unfair competition law has gradually distanced itself from the tort law in the process of modernization,highlighting the characteristics of the law for competitive institutional protection.Based on the clarification of the abused concept of right by Hohfeld and Commons,the current regulation of unfair competition behavior in the digital economy can clearly reveal that the anti⁃unfair competition law aims to protect the legal interests of free competition without distortion.