Mediante la presente investigación, buscamos realizar un análisis y crítica de los
principales pronunciamientos existentes sobre el Principio de Adecuación Social
en la modalidad de inducción a cometer actos ilegales. Para ello evaluaremos los
pronunciamientos emitidos en virtud de las normas que han existido sobre la
materia a lo largo de estos años, tanto por parte del Instituto Nacional de Defensa
de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual, así como por
parte del Consejo Nacional de Autorregulación Publicitaria.
En base a ello, junto a lo desarrollado por parte de la doctrina, buscamos resaltar
y diferenciar los aciertos y desaciertos contenidos en dichos pronunciamientos.
De esta manera, buscamos establecer que, a nuestro criterio, dicho principio debe
ser interpretado considerando los siguientes parámetros interpretativos: i)
“inducir”, debe ser considerado como convencer y determinar la comisión del acto
ilegal, de manera objetiva y fácticamente comprobable; ii) “acto ilegal” es solo
norma de rango de ley; iii) para acreditar una inducción a cometer un acto ilegal,
se deben presentar pruebas suficientes que constaten una relación causal entre
la visualización de la publicidad y un aumento en la comisión del acto ilegal, y; iv)
una modalidad de inducción a cometer actos ilegales sería convencer al
destinatario que dicha conducta no es ilegal y que, en base a ello, este la replique. / By means of this research, we seek to analyze and criticize the main existing
pronouncements on the Principle of Social Adequacy in the modality of inducement
to commit illegal acts. For this purpose, we will evaluate the pronouncements issued
under the rules that have existed on the matter over the years, both by the National
Institute for the Defense of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property, as
well as by the National Council for Advertising Self-Regulation.
On this basis, together with what has been developed by the doctrine, we seek to
highlight and differentiate the rights and wrongs contained in such pronouncements.
In this way, we seek to establish that, in our opinion, such principle must be
interpreted considering the following interpretative parameters: (i) "inducing", must
be considered as convincing and determining the commission of the illegal act, in
an objective and factually verifiable manner; (ii) "illegal act" is only a norm of the
rank of law; (iii) in order to prove an inducement to commit an illegal act, sufficient
evidence must be presented to prove a causal relationship between the
visualization of the advertising and an increase in the commission of the illegal act,
and; (iv) a modality of inducement to commit illegal acts would be to convince the
recipient that such conduct is not illegal and that, based on this, the recipient would
replicate it. / Trabajo académico
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PUCP/oai:tesis.pucp.edu.pe:20.500.12404/27409 |
| Date | 27 March 2024 |
| Creators | Rojas Aliaga, Enzo Andre Martin |
| Contributors | Sánchez Povis, Lucio Andrés |
| Publisher | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, PE |
| Source Sets | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Language | Spanish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis |
| Format | application/pdf, application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess, Atribución 2.5 Perú, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/pe/ |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds