本文引用相关案例阐述了网络主播与直播平台之间的法律关系如何认定、主播违反与直播平台之间的合作协议,怎样承担违约责任等相关问题。总结出在两者法律关系的认定上面应该结合案例中所表现出的特定条款以及在实践中所反映出的不同情...本文引用相关案例阐述了网络主播与直播平台之间的法律关系如何认定、主播违反与直播平台之间的合作协议,怎样承担违约责任等相关问题。总结出在两者法律关系的认定上面应该结合案例中所表现出的特定条款以及在实践中所反映出的不同情形来区分。其次,在违约责任方面,网络主播主张合同约定的违约金明显过高请求予以减少的,在实际损失难以确定的情形下,人民法院可以根据网络直播行业特点,用诚实信用原则进行衡量,以网络主播从平台中获取的实际收益为参考基础,结合平台前期投入、平台流量、主播真实承受能力等因素合理酌定。This article cites relevant cases to explain how to determine the legal relationship between online anchors and live broadcast platforms, how anchors bear liability for breaching contract and cooperation agreement with live broadcast platforms. It is concluded that the determination of the legal relationship between the two should be distinguished in combination with the specific provisions shown in the case and the different situations reflected in practice. Second, in terms of liability for breach of contract, where an online anchor claims that the liquidated damages agreed in the contract are obviously too high and requests a reduction, where the actual losses are difficult to determine, the people’s court may use the principle of good faith to weigh them based on the characteristics of the online livestreaming industry, and make a reasonable determination based on the actual benefits obtained by the online anchor from the platform, taking into account factors such as the platform’s upfront investment, platform traffic, and the anchor’s true ability to bear it.展开更多
文摘本文引用相关案例阐述了网络主播与直播平台之间的法律关系如何认定、主播违反与直播平台之间的合作协议,怎样承担违约责任等相关问题。总结出在两者法律关系的认定上面应该结合案例中所表现出的特定条款以及在实践中所反映出的不同情形来区分。其次,在违约责任方面,网络主播主张合同约定的违约金明显过高请求予以减少的,在实际损失难以确定的情形下,人民法院可以根据网络直播行业特点,用诚实信用原则进行衡量,以网络主播从平台中获取的实际收益为参考基础,结合平台前期投入、平台流量、主播真实承受能力等因素合理酌定。This article cites relevant cases to explain how to determine the legal relationship between online anchors and live broadcast platforms, how anchors bear liability for breaching contract and cooperation agreement with live broadcast platforms. It is concluded that the determination of the legal relationship between the two should be distinguished in combination with the specific provisions shown in the case and the different situations reflected in practice. Second, in terms of liability for breach of contract, where an online anchor claims that the liquidated damages agreed in the contract are obviously too high and requests a reduction, where the actual losses are difficult to determine, the people’s court may use the principle of good faith to weigh them based on the characteristics of the online livestreaming industry, and make a reasonable determination based on the actual benefits obtained by the online anchor from the platform, taking into account factors such as the platform’s upfront investment, platform traffic, and the anchor’s true ability to bear it.