Legal Regulation Research On Online Shopping Speculation Behavior

In recent years,China’s electronic economy has developed rapidly,and online shopping as an emerging form of consumption,the status of user evaluation mechanism is undoubtedly pivotal.Unfavorable factors such as the ease of real-time online information,the negligence of online platform supervision,and the lack of online credit concepts have all led to widespread and repeated prohibitions on online shopping.As two dimensions of credit speculation,positive order brushing causes damage to the basic rights and interests of consumers,and reverse order brushing is also immeasurable to the fair market trading system.For this reason,clarifying the domain to which online shopping orders belong and defining the status of online market transaction entities is the basic prerequisite for effective regulation of online shopping transactions.Through the rules of legal action effect of civil law and the false publicity regulation system of economic law,it is not difficult to see that China’s current normative composition is still deficient.Reliance on existing theoretical principles to fill legal loopholes is equally inadequate.In view of this,we should take the relatively mature legal regulation system of foreign countries as a mirror to conduct in-depth discussions on improving the legal regulation of online shopping in China.From the perspective of comparative law,the construction of credit evaluation system,the principle of reasonable expectations of consumers,and the accountability mechanism of relevant entities constitute the three dimensions of curbing online order laundering.Based on this important reference,China’s code of conduct for order speculation should be reshaped around three aspects:the improvement of the legal evaluation system,the remedy of consumer rights and interests,and the construction of an online supervision platform.After clarifying that the concept of false advertising should be expanded to include false positive information,the scope of administrative law enforcement and jurisdiction must be expanded accordingly.At the same time,in terms of rights and interests relief,adjudicators must appropriately reduce consumers’ burden of proof and expand the scope of subjects bearing responsibility,so that consumers’ remedies channels can be smoother.Litigation is not yet the end of the online bill trading behavior norm system,and the market regulatory authorities need to investigate the dispute and initiate accountability procedures for relevant entities through the credit reporting system and information collection.