短视频平台重复侵权行为适用“过滤义务”的本土化改造
Localization Transformation of “Filtering Obligations” for Repeated Infringement on Short Video Platforms
摘要: 近年来,短视频行业异军突起。然而,业态发展中,也催生了大量短视频侵权纠纷,重复侵权现象屡见不鲜,但是囿于规则的束缚,权利人的合法权益无法得到有效保护。一方面,我国赖以认定注意义务的“通知–删除”规则和红旗规则在实践中对短视频重复侵权行为遏制效果有限;另一方面,过滤义务虽能有效解决短视频重复侵权难题,却与我国本土情况缺乏匹配性。因此,坚持完善“避风港规则”为主导的注意义务认定规则,辅之以对过滤义务进行本土化改造是目前解决短视频平台中重复侵权难题的可行途径。
Abstract:
In recent years, the short video industry has experienced rapid growth. However, along with its development, numerous disputes involving copyright infringement have emerged, with repeated infringements being a common occurrence. Unfortunately, due to the constraints of existing rules, the legitimate rights and interests of rights holders cannot be effectively protected. On the one hand, China’s “notice-and-takedown” rules and red flag rules, which are used to identify the duty of care, have limited effectiveness in curbing repeated infringement on short video platforms. On the other hand, although filtering obligations can effectively address the problem of repeated infringement, they lack compatibility with the local conditions in China. Therefore, it is a feasible approach to adhere to the improvement of the “safe harbor rules” as the main basis for identifying the duty of care, supplemented by the localization transformation of filtering obligations, in order to solve the problem of repeated infringement on short video platforms.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
田小军, 郭雨笛.设定平台版权过滤义务视角下的短视频平台版权治理研究[J]. 出版发行研究, 2019, 328(3): 66-69.
|
|
[2]
|
The European Parliament and of the Council. (2019) Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Single Market and Amending Direc-tives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC (Text with EEA Relevance). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/790/oj
|
|
[3]
|
马诗雅. 网络信息存储服务平台版权过滤义务研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 上海: 华东政法大学知识产权学院, 2021.
|
|
[4]
|
朱开鑫. 从“通知移除规则”到“通知屏蔽规则”——《数字千年版权法》“避风港制度”现代化路径分析[J]. 电子知识产权, 2020, 342(5): 42-52.
|
|
[5]
|
马胜男. 网络服务提供者著作权过滤义务研究——以欧盟立法实践及其对我国立法的启示为视角[J]. 社会科学动态, 2021, 49(1): 64-72.
|
|
[6]
|
杨芸. 短视频平台适用避风港规则的法律问题研究[J]. 上海法学研究, 2021, 6(2): 331-346.
|
|
[7]
|
冯晓青, 许耀乘. 破解短视频版权治理困境:社会治理模式的引入与构建[J]. 新闻与传播研究, 2020, 27(10): 56-76+127.
|
|
[8]
|
沈世娟, 季盼盼. 短视频App平台间接侵权责任认定探究[J]. 南京理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 33(4): 33-39.
|
|
[9]
|
石若琪. 网络服务提供者著作权侵权的二元化审查模式探究[J]. 上海法学研究, 2021, 12: 103-109.
|
|
[10]
|
张晓君, 上官鹏. 中国在线内容分享平台版权责任的配置路径——兼评《数字化单一市场版权指令》第17条平台承担“过滤义务”的观照[J]. 出版发行研究, 2021, 356(7): 70-75.
|
|
[11]
|
刘家瑞. 论我国网络服务商的避风港规则——兼评“十一大唱片公司诉雅虎案”[J]. 知识产权, 2009, 19(2): 13-22.
|
|
[12]
|
彭辉, 姚颉靖. 我国避风港规则适用的实证分析与对策研究——以170份裁判书为视角[J]. 华中科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2012, 26(2): 58-65.
|
|
[13]
|
曾俊. 论《欧盟版权改革指令》第17条对中国在线内容分享平台责任的启示[J]. 德国研究, 2020, 35(3): 125-141+163-164.
|
|
[14]
|
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.
|
|
[15]
|
姚志伟. 公法阴影下的避风港——以网络服务提供者的审查义务为中心[J]. 环球法律评论, 2018, 40(1): 100-109.
|
|
[16]
|
王迁. 知识产权法教程[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2021: 284.
|
|
[17]
|
冯晓青. 知识产权法利益平衡理论[M]. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2006: 1.
|