数字时代“通知–删除”规则的适用困境与优化路径研究
The Applicability Dilemmas and Optimization Pathways of the “Notice-Deletion” Rule in the Digital Era
摘要: 作为数字时代侵权治理的基石性制度,“通知–删除”规则在协调权利保障与平台发展维度具有不可替代的功能。但是,在数字技术加速演进的背景下,审视我国现行的“通知–删除”规则运行实效,发现其存在现有责任主体判定范式难以涵盖新型网络服务提供者、网络服务提供者采取必要措施时效缺乏量化标准以及反通知机制被架空这三重制度性适用困境。面对数字治理现代化的现实需求,本文针对性提出“通知–删除”规则制度优化路径,通过拓展责任主体范畴、构建时效梯度响应体系、健全反通知运行程序,以期构建起多方利益均衡的治理新范式。
Abstract: As a cornerstone institution for infringement governance in the digital era, the “Notice-Deletion” Rule plays an irreplaceable role in balancing rights protection and platform development. However, against the backdrop of accelerating digital technological advancements, an examination of the operational effectiveness of China’s current “notice-and-takedown” rule reveals three institutional applicability dilemmas: the existing paradigm for determining liable entities struggles to encompass emerging network service providers, the lack of quantifiable standards for the timeliness of reasonable measures taken by service providers, and the marginalization of user counter-notice mechanisms. In response to the practical demands of modernizing digital governance, this paper proposes targeted optimization pathways for the “Notice-Deletion” Rule. By expanding the scope of liable entities, constructing a tiered timeliness response system, and improving the operational procedures for counter-notices, the aim is to establish a new governance paradigm that balances the interests of multiple stakeholders.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
杨立新. 网络服务提供者在网络侵权避风港规则中的地位和义务[J]. 福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2020(5): 139-147+172.
|
|
[2]
|
兰昊. 电商领域知识产权“通知-删除”规则的困境与出路[J]. 知识产权, 2020(4): 53-65.
|
|
[3]
|
毕文轩. 新型网络服务提供者的定性与责任建构: 兼评阿里云服务器案[J]. 电子知识产权, 2020(2): 79-94.
|
|
[4]
|
刘文杰. “通知-删除”规定、必要措施与网络责任避风港: 微信小程序案引发的思考[J]. 电子知识产权, 2019(4): 4-13.
|
|
[5]
|
马更新. “通知-删除”规则的检视与完善[J]. 政治与法律, 2022(10): 147-160.
|
|
[6]
|
徐琢. 《民法典》时代著作权“通知-必要措施”规则适用与完善——以新型网络服务提供者为视角[J]. 中国版权, 2021(3): 42-47.
|
|
[7]
|
孔祥俊. “互联网条款”对于新类型网络服务的适用问题——从“通知删除”到“通知加采取必要措施” [J]. 政法论丛, 2020(1): 52-66.
|