从《电子商务法》视角看著作权侵权中平台的注意义务

Platform’s Duty of Care in Copyright Infringement from the Perspective of the “E-Commerce Law”

摘要: 在数字经济时代，电子商务平台已成为作品传播与交易的重要场域，平台在著作权侵权中的法律责任，尤其是其注意义务的边界，是知识产权保护与平台经济发展的核心议题。《中华人民共和国电子商务法》(以下简称《电子商务法》)确立了以“通知–必要措施”为核心的责任规则，标志着平台责任从被动应对向主动审慎管理转变。本文以《电子商务法》及相关司法解释为依据，系统剖析平台注意义务的法律内涵。该义务是一个动态过程，涵盖事前对经营者资质的审核、事中对侵权通知的处置及事后对重复侵权的防范。其核心在于，平台对显而易见的侵权负有主动处理义务(即“红旗原则”)，而“必要措施”的采取需遵循合理审慎原则，依据侵权情节、技术条件等具体判断。当前实践面临主要困境：平台“应知”的判断标准仍具主观性；对热播作品等是否存在事前过滤义务存在争议；“通知–必要措施”规则在复杂侵权场景中适用困难。为构建利益平衡的治理体系，未来应致力于明确“应知”的客观化判断标准，建立与技术能力和知情程度相匹配的梯度化义务体系，并鼓励平台采用技术手段提升治理效能，最终推动形成平台尽责、权利人维权、用户守法的知识产权共治生态。

Abstract: In the era of digital economy, e-commerce platforms have become a crucial arena for the dissemination and transaction of works. The legal liability of platforms in copyright infringement, particularly the boundaries of their duty of care, is a core issue in intellectual property protection and the development of the platform economy. The E-commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the “E-commerce Law”) establishes a liability rule centered on the “notice-necessary measures” principle, marking a shift from passive response to proactive and prudent management of platform responsibilities. Based on “the E-commerce Law” and relevant judicial interpretations, this paper systematically analyzes the legal connotation of the platform’s duty of care. This duty is a dynamic process encompassing pre-event qualification reviews of operators, mid-event handling of infringement notices, and post-event prevention of repeated infringements. Its core lies in the platform’s obligation to actively address obvious infringements (i.e., the “flag principle”), while the implementation of “necessary measures” must adhere to the principle of reasonable prudence, determined based on specific factors such as the nature of the infringement and technical capabilities. Current practices face key challenges: the subjective nature of the “should know” standard for platforms remains unresolved; there is debate over whether platforms have a pre-event filtering obligation for popular works; and the “notice-necessary measures” rule struggles to apply in complex infringement scenarios. To build a balanced governance system, future efforts should focus on clarifying objective standards for determining “should know,” establishing a tiered duty system aligned with technical capabilities and awareness levels, and encouraging platforms to adopt technological measures to enhance governance effectiveness. Ultimately, this will foster an intellectual property co-governance ecosystem where platforms fulfill their responsibilities, rights holders safeguard their interests, and users comply with the law.