چارچوبی برای مسئولیت پلتفرم‌های آنلاین مبادله‌ای متناسب با ماهیت آن‌ها

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تهران جنوب، تهران، ایران.

10.22034/jstp.2025.11801.1829

چکیده

پلتفرم‌های آنلاین طی دهه‌های اخیر به بازیگرانی کلیدی در عرصه ارتباطات دیجیتال و شیوه‌های نوین کسب‌وکار تبدیل شده‌اند. با رشد و گسترش سریع این بسترها، مسئله مسئولیت‌پذیری آن‌ها در قبال رفتار کاربران و شیوه نظارت بر تعاملات دیجیتال، اهمیت فزاینده‌ای پیدا کرده است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف ارائه چارچوبی نظری مبتنی بر تجارب ملی، به بررسی نحوه کنش مسئولانه پلتفرم‌های ایرانیِ مبتنی بر مبادله در حوزه‌های منتخب پرداخته و تلاش دارد مرزهای مسئولیت آن‌ها را در قبال مبادلات شکل‌گرفته در بستر پلتفرمی روشن سازد. این مطالعه با بهره‌گیری از روش تحلیل مضمون و مصاحبه‌های نیمه ساختاریافته با خبرگان متنوعی از نهادهای حاکمیتی و بخش خصوصی، به شناسایی و تحلیل مسئولیت‌های پلتفرم‌ها بر اساس جایگاه و میزان مداخله آن‌ها در تبادلات مالی، داده‌ای و زنجیره ارزش می‌پردازد. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد پلتفرم‌هایی که در مبادلات مالی یا فیزیکی میان کاربران نقش مستقیم ایفا می‌کنند، در قبال تضمین امنیت، کیفیت تبادل و صیانت از حقوق کاربران، مسئولیت بیشتری بر عهده دارند. به همین دلیل، تدوین چارچوب‌های حقوقی و مقررات نظارتی متناسب با این نقش‌ها، ضرورتی اجتناب‌ناپذیر است. در مقابل، پلتفرم‌هایی که صرفاً به‌عنوان واسطه داده‌ای یا اطلاعاتی عمل می‌کنند، از مسئولیت مستقیم کمتری نسبت به محتوا و کالا (خدمت) مبادله‌شده برخوردارند. در این موارد، بهره‌گیری از ترکیبی از نظارت دولتی و سازوکارهای خودتنظیمی، رویکردی مؤثر برای حفظ تعادل میان کارایی اقتصادی و پاسخ‌گویی اجتماعی است. در مجموع، یافته‌های تحقیق بر ضرورت اتخاذ سیاست‌های افتراقی و متناسب با نقش و عملکرد پلتفرم‌ها تأکید دارد تا رفتار مسئولانه و منافع کسب‌وکار به طور هم‌زمان تضمین شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Framework for the Responsibility of Online Transaction Platforms in Line with Their Nature

نویسنده [English]

  • Zohreh Karimmian
Assistant Professor, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Online platforms have played a central role in digital communication and business environments in recent decades. As these platforms have grown and expanded, their responsibilities regarding user behavior and its oversight have become increasingly significant. This study aims to propose a theoretical framework—based on national experiences—for the responsible conduct of Iranian online transaction platforms in selected domains. It seeks to delineate the boundaries of their responsibilities concerning the transactions they facilitate. Using thematic analysis and expert interviews, the study identifies and analyzes platform responsibilities based on their role in financial transactions, data flows, and value chains. The findings indicate that platforms with a direct role in financial and physical transactions between users bear greater responsibility for ensuring the security and quality of transactions and for protecting user rights. Accordingly, appropriate legal and regulatory frameworks are required to govern platform responsibilities. On the other hand, platforms that serve solely as data intermediaries have more limited responsibilities regarding the transactions themselves, pointing to a need for a combination of governmental oversight and self-regulation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Platform Responsibility
  • Digital Regulation
  • Transaction Platform
  • Iranian Platform
[1] Suzor, N. (2018). Digital Constitutionalism: Using the Rule of Law to Evaluate the Legitimacy of Governance by Platforms. Social Media+ Society, 4(3), 2056305118787812. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118787812 
[2] Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions that Shape Social Media. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300235029 
[3] Hesam, A. , modibo Joni, M. , Miri, H. and Yamrali, S. (2021). Liability of Online Platforms for Violating Information Privacy by Users; A Comparative Study Among Iran, the United States and the European UnionCommunication Research, 28(107), 69-91. https://doi:10.22082/cr.2021.530918.2202.{In Persian}.
[4] Helberger, N., Pierson, J., & Poell, T. (2018). Governing Online Platforms: From Contested to Cooperative Responsibility. The information society, 34(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2017.1391913 
[5] Gillespie, T. (2020). Content Moderation, AI, and the Question of Scale. Big Data & Society, 7(2), 2053951720943234. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720943234 
[6] Gorwa, R. (2019). The Platform Governance Triangle: Conceptualising the Informal Regulation of Online Content. Internet Policy Review, 8(2), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1407 
[7] Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021). The Echo Chamber Effect on Social Media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(9), e2023301118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118 
[8] Flew, T. (2021). The Challenge of Media Platform Regulation for Small and Medium-Sized Nations. Available at SSRN 3951610.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3951610 
[9] Heldt, A., & Dreyer, S. (2021). Competent Third Parties and Content Moderation on Platforms: Potentials of Independent Decision-Making Bodies from A Governance Structure Perspective. Journal of Information Policy.  https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0266 
[10] Horowitz, M. A., Nieminen, H., & Sirkkunen, E. (2022). Assessing Media Platformization in Small Nations: A Rights-Based Approach. Journal of Creative Industries and Cultural Studies: JOCIS, (8), 33-50.
[11]  Bietti, E. (2023). A Genealogy of Digital Platform Regulation. Geo. L. Tech. Rev., 7, 1. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3859487 
[12] Buiten, M. C. (2021). The Digital Services Act From Intermediary Liability to Platform Regulation. J. Intell. Prop. Info. Tech. & Elec. Com. L., 12, 361. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3876328 
[13] Cennamo, C. (2020). Value Preserving Platform Regulation: Network Effects, Platform Value and Regulatory Remedies. Platform Value and Regulatory Remedies (October 10, 2020). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3901715 
[14] Iglesias Keller, C. (2021). Policy by Judicialisation: the Institutional Framework for Intermediary Liability in Brazil. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 35(3), 185-203. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2020.1792035 
[15] Flew, T. (2023). The Return of the Regulatory State: Nation-States as Policy Actors in Digital Platform Governance. In Global Communication Governance at the Crossroads (pp. 161-178). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29616-1_10 
[16] Faddoul, M., Chaslot, G., & Farid, H. (2020). A Longitudinal Analysis of Youtube’s Promotion of Conspiracy Videos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.03318. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.03318
[17] Bail, C. A., Guay, B., Maloney, E., Combs, A., Hillygus, D. S., Merhout, F., ... & Volfovsky, A. (2020). Assessing the Russian Internet Research Agency’s Impact on the Political Attitudes and Behaviors of American Twitter Users in Late 2017. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 117(1), 243-250. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906420116 
[18] Tworek, H., & Leerssen, P. (2019). An Analysis of Germany’s NetzDG law. First session of the Transatlantic High Level Working Group on Content Moderation Online and Freedom of Expression.
[19] Celeste, E. (2022). Digital Constitutionalism: The Role of Internet Bills of Rights (p. 254). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003256908-6 
[20] Lindseth, P. L. (2022). The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avad001 
[21] Gorwa, R., Binns, R., & Katzenbach, C. (2020). Algorithmic Content Moderation: Technical and Political Challenges in the Automation of Platform Governance. Big Data & Society, 7(1), 2053951719897945. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/fj6pg 
[22] Einav, L., Farronato, C., & Levin, J. (2016). Peer-To-Peer Markets. Annual Review of Economics, 8(1), 615-635.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080315-015334 
[23] Teubner, T., Hawlitschek, F., & Adam, M. T. (2019). Reputation transfer. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 61, 229-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-00574-z 
[24] Chakraborty, A., Hannak, A., Biega, A. J., & Gummadi, K. (2017). Fair Sharing for Sharing Economy Platforms. In Fairness, Accountability and Transparency in Recommender Systems-Workshop on Responsible Recommendation. https://doi.org/10.18122/b2bx2s 
[25] Filatova-Bilous, N. (2021). Once Again Platform Liability: on the Edge of the 'Uber' and 'Airbnb' Cases. Internet Policy Review, 10. https://doi.org/10.14763/2021.2.1559 
[26] Ahmed, F., Wei, L., Niu, Y., Zhao, T., Zhang, W., Dong, Z., & Dong, W. (2022). Toward FineGrained Access Control and Privacy Protection for Video Sharing in Media Convergence Environment. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 37, 3025-3049. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22810 
[27] Pham, S., Kuipou, F. R., Arbanowski, S., & Steglich, S. (2018). On the Current State of Interoperable Content Protection for internet video streaming. 2018 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Communications and Electronics (ICCE), 13-17. https://doi.org/10.1109/cce.2018.8465735 
[28] Gillespie, T. (2010). The Politics of ‘Platforms’. New Media & Society, 12(3), 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809342738 
[29] Hänninen, M. (2020). Review of Studies on Digital Transaction Platforms in Marketing Journals. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 30(2), 164-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2019.1651380 
[30] Maultzsch, F. (2018). Contractual Liability of Online Platform Operators: European Proposals and Established Principles. European Review of Contract Law, 14(3), 209–240. https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2018-1013 
[31] Recker, J., Bockelmann, T., & Barthel, F. (2024). Growing Online‐to‐Offline Platform Businesses: How Vytal Became The WorldLeading Provider of Smart Reusable Food Packaging. Information Systems Journal, 34(1), 179-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12474 
[32] Evans, P. C., & Gawer, A. (2016). The rise of the platform enterprise: A global survey.
[33] Hokkanen, H., Hänninen, M., Yrjölä, M., & Saarijärvi, H. (2021). From customer to actor value propositions: An analysis of digital transaction platforms. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 31(3), 257–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2021.1880463 
[34] Chen, Xianzhu. (2024). On the Responsibility of Network Trading Platform Providers – Discussion on Article 44 of the Consumer Rights and Interests Protection Law of the People's Republic of China. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology, 6(8), 11–15.  https://doi.org/10.25236/ijfs.2024.060803 
[35] Tanaka, S. (2020). Digital Platformers’ Responsibilities to Platform Users;‘Consumer Protection’in B2C and C2C e-Commerce. In Innovation and the Transformation of Consumer Law: National and International Perspectives (pp. 47-52). Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8948-5_6 
[36] Ullrich, C. (2018). A Risk-Based Approach Towards Infringement Prevention on the Internet: Adopting the Anti-Money Laundering Framework to online Platforms. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 26(3), 226-251. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eay008 
[37] Kamali, Y. (2018). Methodology of Thematic Analysis and its Application in Public Policy Studies. Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 4(2), 189-208. https://doi: 10.22059/ppolicy.2018.67875 {In Persian}.
[38] Tayebi Abolhasani, A. (2019). Introduction to Research Methodology: Standard Procedures for Qualitative Data AnalysisScience and Technology Policy Letters09(2), 67-96 {In Persian}.
[39] Narimani, M. , Karimmian, Z. and Hosseini, S. J. (2020). An Institutional Framework for Regulating New Business Models: A Case Study of Application-based TransportationIranian Journal of Public Policy6(1), 9-34. https://doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2020.76998 {In Persian}.
[40] Dhanpat, N., Buthelezi, Z. P., Joe, M. R., Maphela, T. V., & Shongwe, N. (2020). Industry 4.0: The Role of Human Resource Professionals. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(1), 1-11.