算法时代下版权过滤机制的本土回应与选择

The Local Response and Choice of Copyright Filtering Mechanism in the Era of Algorithms

摘要: 自2019年欧盟引入版权过滤机制以来，关于网络服务提供者是否应当承担过滤义务的问题，学界一直存在不同的意见，究其根本原因是对版权过滤的属性没有准确的界定。虽然欧盟引入了版权过滤机制，但对于该条的转化适用其各成员国之间亦存在争议，而美国对于是否引入对于版权过滤机制，在其经过反复审视后仍坚持适用“避风港”规则，并且无论是欧盟还是美国都认可网络平台提供者可以与著作权人、用户三方达成版权过滤的合同机制。因此，我国在引入版权过滤机制上，不应当盲目的认为版权过滤是网络服务平台的一种义务，而应当在明晰其是一种自治机制，故应当在坚持平台自治的基础上，加强版权过滤机制与强制规则的衔接从而更好的化解版权纠纷，促进互联网版权产业的发展。

Abstract: Since the introduction of the copyright filtering mechanism in the EU in 2019, there have been different opinions in the academic community on the question of whether network service providers should bear the filtering obligations, and the fundamental reason is that there is no accurate definition of the attributes of copyright filtering. Although the EU has introduced a copyright filtering mechanism, there are also disputes among its member states about the transformation and application of this article, and the United States still insists on applying the “safe harbor” rule after repeated scrutiny on whether to introduce a copyright filtering mechanism, and both the EU and the United States recognize that online platform providers can reach a copyright filtering contract mechanism with copyright owners and users. Therefore, in the introduction of the copyright filtering mechanism, China should not blindly think that copyright filtering is an obligation of the network service platform, but should make it clear that it is an autonomous mechanism, so on the basis of adhering to the autonomy of the platform, strengthen the connection between the copyright filtering mechanism and the mandatory rules, so as to better resolve copyright disputes and promote the development of the Internet copyright industry.