“通知–删除”规则的适用困境与优化路径
The Application Challenges and Optimization Pathways of the “Notice and Takedown” Rule
摘要: 随着算法推荐技术的广泛应用,著作权侵权治理正面临严重危机。传统“通知–删除”规则的被动处理机制,在侵权规模化、隐蔽化、动态化趋势下,已暴露出明显的制度性失灵。司法实践显示,权利人维权成本攀升、救济滞后、责任分配失衡等问题日益突出。建议在既有规则框架下,给具备技术能力的中大型平台增设主动过滤义务,作为对必要措施内涵的延伸性解释。同时,过滤机制的构建应通过设置门槛、触发条件等方式在平台责任、权利人利益与公众信息自由之间寻求平衡。
Abstract: With the widespread application of algorithmic recommendation technology, the governance of copyright infringement is facing a severe crisis. The passive handling mechanism of the traditional “Notice and Takedown” rule has revealed evident institutional failures under the trends of large-scale, covert, and dynamic infringement. Judicial practice shows that issues including soaring enforcement costs for rights holders, delayed remedies, and imbalanced responsibility allocation are becoming increasingly prominent. It is proposed that within the existing regulatory framework, proactive filtering obligations be imposed on medium-to-large platforms with technical capabilities as an extended interpretation of the necessary measures. Meanwhile, the construction of filtering mechanisms should seek a balance among platform liability, rights holders’ interests, and public information freedom by setting thresholds and triggering conditions.
文章引用:唐紫萱. “通知–删除”规则的适用困境与优化路径[J]. 法学, 2026, 14(1): 105-111. https://doi.org/10.12677/ojls.2026.141014

参考文献

[1] 丁晓东. 作为举报治理的通知删除: 避风港规则反思[J]. 法学论坛, 2025, 40(2): 42-54.
[2] 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.
[3] 万勇. 著作权法强制性过滤机制的中国选择[J]. 法商研究, 2021, 38(6): 184-196.
[4] 王磊, 单墨涵. 算法治理下平台版权分级过滤义务探析[J]. 中国出版, 2024(16): 51-56.
[5] 王骁. 网络服务提供者的版权内容过滤义务及其适用规则[J]. 中国政法大学学报, 2025(3): 176-190.
[6] 冯晓青. 网络平台算法推荐著作权侵权认定及其规制[J]. 政法论丛, 2025(5): 60-76.
[7] 彭学龙, 刘小威. 知识产权侵权平台责任论: 从被动免责到主动治理[J]. 知识产权, 2024(12): 27-44.
[8] 李承亮, 韩洛斯. 网络服务提供者承担版权过滤义务的条件[J]. 大连理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2025, 46(5): 64-71.
[9] 刘友华, 李扬帆. 短视频平台强制性版权过滤义务的质疑与责任规则的优化[J]. 法学杂志, 2023, 44(3): 138-156.
[10] 陶乾. 短视频平台“避风港规则”与过滤义务的适用场景[J]. 中国出版, 2022(8): 66-69.