数字经济的叙事:平台如何挑战消费者法和等级组织

Q2 Social Sciences
Global Jurist Pub Date : 2020-06-29 DOI:10.1515/gj-2020-0026
A. Quarta
{"title":"数字经济的叙事:平台如何挑战消费者法和等级组织","authors":"A. Quarta","doi":"10.1515/gj-2020-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Digital platforms are the essential infrastructures of electronic commerce, online communication, and digital social relationships. They connect two interdependent groups of web users (parties offering goods, services, and digital content; and parties interested in accessing this supply) and enable their transactions. Moreover, they provide additional services such as online payment, collection of reviews and feedback, and internal instant messaging. However, the term “platform” can be misleading, since it seems to denote a virtual space or a technical tool without legal personality. In other words, platforms are masking corporations who hide behind them in order to avoid the legal responsibilities stemming from their status as social institutions. This exploits the dominant theory of the firm as a nexus of contracts and is intended to release the agents involved in the system of production from the restrictions that protect weaker parties in the age of industrial capitalism. Companies who organize production through platforms thus obtain both indirect and direct benefits. In particular, indirect benefits derive from making consumer law more complicated to apply by creating conditions that frustrate the traditional distinction between professionals and consumers. In fact, any user can provide services and sell or share their personal goods (e.g., cars, apartments, clothes, etc.) and other commodities through platforms. However, this does not mean that information asymmetries do not continue to exist, or that weaker parties do not need to be protected. This confusion benefits companies that enable these transactions, since online relationships are not burdened by informative duties. In this case, companies use the platform narrative to facilitate peer-to-peer transactions, where simple, ubiquitous exchanges yield advantages. In addition, platforms provide direct benefits by eliminating the hierarchical organization of their production system in order to adopt the least burdensome and most flexible forms of employment. Companies generally rely on ICT tools to show that the parties offering the service are independent and are not subject to their control. The platform narrative glosses over the labor exploitation issues generally referred to as “uberification”. In addressing the questions outlined in this introduction, the paper will be organized as follows. Part I will discuss how the platform economy is challenging consumer law by short-circuiting its legal grounds in ways that allow companies to benefit. Part II will focus on the direct effects of the platforms’ denial of hierarchical organization: starting from the Italian Supreme Court’s ruling in the Foodora lawsuit, we will explore emergent models for organizing the system of production and their impact on the main categories of private law.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2020-0026","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Narratives of the Digital Economy: How Platforms Are Challenging Consumer Law and Hierarchical Organization\",\"authors\":\"A. Quarta\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/gj-2020-0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Digital platforms are the essential infrastructures of electronic commerce, online communication, and digital social relationships. They connect two interdependent groups of web users (parties offering goods, services, and digital content; and parties interested in accessing this supply) and enable their transactions. Moreover, they provide additional services such as online payment, collection of reviews and feedback, and internal instant messaging. However, the term “platform” can be misleading, since it seems to denote a virtual space or a technical tool without legal personality. In other words, platforms are masking corporations who hide behind them in order to avoid the legal responsibilities stemming from their status as social institutions. This exploits the dominant theory of the firm as a nexus of contracts and is intended to release the agents involved in the system of production from the restrictions that protect weaker parties in the age of industrial capitalism. Companies who organize production through platforms thus obtain both indirect and direct benefits. In particular, indirect benefits derive from making consumer law more complicated to apply by creating conditions that frustrate the traditional distinction between professionals and consumers. In fact, any user can provide services and sell or share their personal goods (e.g., cars, apartments, clothes, etc.) and other commodities through platforms. However, this does not mean that information asymmetries do not continue to exist, or that weaker parties do not need to be protected. This confusion benefits companies that enable these transactions, since online relationships are not burdened by informative duties. In this case, companies use the platform narrative to facilitate peer-to-peer transactions, where simple, ubiquitous exchanges yield advantages. In addition, platforms provide direct benefits by eliminating the hierarchical organization of their production system in order to adopt the least burdensome and most flexible forms of employment. Companies generally rely on ICT tools to show that the parties offering the service are independent and are not subject to their control. The platform narrative glosses over the labor exploitation issues generally referred to as “uberification”. In addressing the questions outlined in this introduction, the paper will be organized as follows. Part I will discuss how the platform economy is challenging consumer law by short-circuiting its legal grounds in ways that allow companies to benefit. Part II will focus on the direct effects of the platforms’ denial of hierarchical organization: starting from the Italian Supreme Court’s ruling in the Foodora lawsuit, we will explore emergent models for organizing the system of production and their impact on the main categories of private law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Jurist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2020-0026\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Jurist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2020-0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2020-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

摘要数字平台是电子商务、在线通信和数字社会关系的重要基础设施。它们将两个相互依赖的网络用户群体(提供商品、服务和数字内容的各方;以及有兴趣访问这些供应的各方)连接起来,并实现他们的交易。此外,他们还提供额外的服务,如在线支付、评论和反馈收集以及内部即时消息。然而,“平台”一词可能具有误导性,因为它似乎指的是没有法人资格的虚拟空间或技术工具。换言之,平台掩盖了隐藏在背后的公司,以避免因其社会机构身份而产生的法律责任。这利用了公司作为合同纽带的主导理论,旨在使参与生产系统的代理人免受工业资本主义时代保护弱势方的限制。通过平台组织生产的公司因此获得了间接和直接的利益。特别是,通过创造条件打破专业人员和消费者之间的传统区别,使消费者法的适用更加复杂,从而产生了间接利益。事实上,任何用户都可以通过平台提供服务,出售或分享他们的个人商品(如汽车、公寓、衣服等)和其他商品。然而,这并不意味着信息不对称不再存在,也不意味着较弱的一方不需要受到保护。这种混乱有利于实现这些交易的公司,因为在线关系没有信息义务的负担。在这种情况下,公司使用平台叙事来促进对等交易,在这种交易中,简单、普遍的交易所会产生优势。此外,平台通过消除其生产系统的层级组织,以采用负担最小、最灵活的就业形式,提供了直接利益。公司通常依靠信息和通信技术工具来表明提供服务的各方是独立的,不受其控制。平台叙事掩盖了通常被称为“过度化”的劳动力剥削问题。为了解决导言中概述的问题,本文件的组织安排如下。第一部分将讨论平台经济如何通过缩短法律依据以使公司受益来挑战消费者法。第二部分将重点讨论平台否认等级组织的直接影响:从意大利最高法院对Foodora诉讼的裁决开始,我们将探讨组织生产系统的新兴模式及其对私法主要类别的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Narratives of the Digital Economy: How Platforms Are Challenging Consumer Law and Hierarchical Organization
Abstract Digital platforms are the essential infrastructures of electronic commerce, online communication, and digital social relationships. They connect two interdependent groups of web users (parties offering goods, services, and digital content; and parties interested in accessing this supply) and enable their transactions. Moreover, they provide additional services such as online payment, collection of reviews and feedback, and internal instant messaging. However, the term “platform” can be misleading, since it seems to denote a virtual space or a technical tool without legal personality. In other words, platforms are masking corporations who hide behind them in order to avoid the legal responsibilities stemming from their status as social institutions. This exploits the dominant theory of the firm as a nexus of contracts and is intended to release the agents involved in the system of production from the restrictions that protect weaker parties in the age of industrial capitalism. Companies who organize production through platforms thus obtain both indirect and direct benefits. In particular, indirect benefits derive from making consumer law more complicated to apply by creating conditions that frustrate the traditional distinction between professionals and consumers. In fact, any user can provide services and sell or share their personal goods (e.g., cars, apartments, clothes, etc.) and other commodities through platforms. However, this does not mean that information asymmetries do not continue to exist, or that weaker parties do not need to be protected. This confusion benefits companies that enable these transactions, since online relationships are not burdened by informative duties. In this case, companies use the platform narrative to facilitate peer-to-peer transactions, where simple, ubiquitous exchanges yield advantages. In addition, platforms provide direct benefits by eliminating the hierarchical organization of their production system in order to adopt the least burdensome and most flexible forms of employment. Companies generally rely on ICT tools to show that the parties offering the service are independent and are not subject to their control. The platform narrative glosses over the labor exploitation issues generally referred to as “uberification”. In addressing the questions outlined in this introduction, the paper will be organized as follows. Part I will discuss how the platform economy is challenging consumer law by short-circuiting its legal grounds in ways that allow companies to benefit. Part II will focus on the direct effects of the platforms’ denial of hierarchical organization: starting from the Italian Supreme Court’s ruling in the Foodora lawsuit, we will explore emergent models for organizing the system of production and their impact on the main categories of private law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Jurist
Global Jurist Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信