The Liability Form of the Operator of E-Commerce Platform for Violating the Security Obligation—Focusing on the Second Paragraph of Article 38 of the E-Commerce LawZichun Ma

《电子商务法》第38条第2款在立法理念上与第1款在价值评价上存在明显的不协调之处。该条第二款对于责任形态的宽泛界定，导致在司法实践中对“相应责任”的认定变得错综复杂，法律条款的适用情境呈现出混乱状态。对“相应的责任”作出解释首先要明确《电子商务法》第38条第2款的规范定位，厘清该条与其他关联条文之间的界限与联系，通过评析不同学者以不同视角对“相应的责任”的分析和归纳，为“相应的责任”之明晰提出建议。There is an obvious inconsistency between the legislative concept of Article 38, Paragraph 2 of the E-Commerce Law and the value evaluation of Paragraph 1. The broad definition of the form of liability in the second paragraph of this article has led to the intricacy of the determination of “corresponding responsibility” in judicial practice, and the application of legal provisions has become confusing. To interpret “corresponding liability”, it is first necessary to clarify the normative positioning of paragraph 2 of Article 38 of the E-Commerce Law, clarify the boundaries and connections between this article and other related provisions, and make suggestions for the clarity of “corresponding responsibility” by evaluating the analysis and induction of "corresponding responsibility" from different perspectives by different scholars.