2011年6月，一场突如其来的中国概念股危机席卷美国纳斯达克证券市场，多家中国概念股票跌幅超过10%，其中人人网、优酷网、当当网、搜狐网、世纪佳缘网等我们耳熟能详的互联网企业首当其冲，在一个月中跌幅超过30%。时至2012年，上一轮危机余波未了，与心有余悸的投资者形成鲜明对比的是更多的中国互联网企业愈挫愈勇，并在2012年7月再遭厄运，迎来第二轮中概股危机，百度、新浪、搜狐三家中国互联网顶梁柱携手创下52周最低。这样惨烈的先例却依旧不能阻止互联网企业远渡重洋，2013年仍有去哪儿网、58同城等网站登陆美国，颇有明知山有虎，偏向虎山行之势。　　何以下跌的中概股以互联网企业居多，又为何更多的互联网企业在这些先辈们遭遇危机后仍一如既往得选择境外资本市场呢？有学者指出，由于受限于国内资本市场严苛的要求和我国的外资准入政策，互联网企业只有走出国门才能得到融资，而国家禁止外资进入互联网行业的法律规定使得这些企业只能选择协议控制模式，此模式是导致中国互联网公司屡遭危机的罪魁祸首。那么什么是协议控制模式，此模式是如何构架的，在其构架过程中涉及到哪些法律关系？只有回答了这个问题，才能寻找到互联网企业在境外上市过程中面临的法律风险，从而提出规避方法，防止这样的悲剧重演。本文正是从此入手，在分析中国互联网公司境外上市概况的基础上，总结互联网企业选择使用协议控制模式到境外上市的原因，进而从法律的角度分析在这种模式的构架过程中存在的风险，并尝试提出相应的防控之策。

June 2011, a sudden crisis swept the Chinese concept stocks on NASDAQ Stock Market, number of Chinese concept stocks fell more than 10%, many network companies that we are familiar with, had bear the brunt, such as Renren, Youku, Dangdang, Sohu, whose stock had fall more than 30% in a month. Then, time came to 2011, when the market had not recovered form the last crisis and the investors still fluttered with fear, yet more and more domestic internet enterprises chose the same road. July 2012, these enterprises suffered another misfortune which was knew as the second round crisis of Chinese concept stocks. In this round, Baidu, Sina, Sohu, these three mainstays of Chinese internet enterprises together hit a 52-week low. However, such tragic precedent can not stop other domestic companies from listing oversea，such as qunar and 58Tongcheng still still listed on the U.S stock market. It seems like these enterprises were quite aware of the risk, but they totally ignored it.By observing this phenomenon, there is a conclusion that the fuse of Chinese concept stocks crisis in 2011 is Alibaba Group unilaterally terminate the agreement on the control of Alipay with Yahoo and Softbank to cancel the VIE structure. And, the origin of crisis in 2012 is that U.S Securities and Exchange Commission questioned the VIE structure of the New East. Both crisis resulted in the VIE mode, which is knew as Variable Interest Entities, so we can determine that the main cause of risk about internet companies listed oversea is the VIE mode. The “Alipay event” in 2011 make VIE mode widely known to the public, then the study about it followed. Existing studies have shown that the original intention of the VIE mode is to circumvent the law, so the legal risk is the main risk about VIE mode. Some scholars proposed a variety of coping strategies from the prospective of national regulatory or business standpoint, but few scholars made the effort to analyze the legal relations involved in the VIE mode and the national regulatory approach from the internet enterprises’ point of view, according which to design a feasible and comprehensive risk-averse strategy. After all, the Chinese network enterprises is the inventors and the largest practitioners of VIE mode. Therefore, they are the most valuable objects of study and the most eagerest groups to get risk-averse strategy. This article, standing on the position of internet companies, tries to research the legal risks existing in the listing process of Chinese internet enterprise which use the VIE mode from the legal point of view.