论“避风港”规则的适用及完善

发布时间：2018-05-30 02:35

本文选题：“避风港”规则 + 网络版权保护　；参考：《山东大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：在当今社会,网络已成为人们获取信息和对外交流的重要手段,广泛深入到社会生活的各个方面,无论对国家还是个人都产生了深刻影响。网络服务的内容和形式也变得多种多样,而网络版权侵权问题也越来越突出。2000年以后,与数字版权相关的网络著作权侵权案件大量涌入各级法院。为了有效应对互联网发展所带来的信息传播问题,我国出台了一系列新的法律和规定,解决了网络版权领域出现的一些问题。但由于网络侵犯著作权行为和方式的复杂性,目前的法律规定还远不能满足司法实践的需要,现有的规定在司法适用中仍存在很大的争议,其中“避风港”规则的适用就出现了不少问题。本文从“避风港”规则的起源入手,概括了“避风港”规则所具有的现实意义。通过对《信息网络传播权保护条例》第22条免责条款的分析,找出“避风港”规则在立法移植和司法实践中的缺陷,并通过这些不足提出了一些完善意见。本文除前言和结语外共分为五个部分。第一部分：“避风港”规则的由来及其价值意义。“避风港”规则最早起源于美国的司法实践,它是在一系列司法案例基础上确立起来的,并通过国会立法《数字千年版权法》最终明确下来。“避风港”规则的确立对于网络著作权保护具有里程碑似的意义。第二部分：外国“避风港”规则的立法实践。在借鉴DMCA基础之上,德国、欧盟等国家和组织结合本国实际,制定出自己的“避风港”规则。“避风港”规则有效平衡了网络服务提供商、著作权人和社会公众的利益,保护了知识产权。促进了互联网企业的发展,实现了科技与法律的双赢。第三部分：我国“避风港”规则的适用现状及存在的问题。该部分对我国网络著作权保护立法状况进行了简单介绍。在我国,目前较为全面规定“避风港”规则的法律是《信息网络传播权保护条例》,虽然《条例》在实践中还存在很多问题,但它在网络著作权保护领域中的地位是不可撼动的。第四部分：“避风港”规则的适用条件分析。以《条例》第22条为出发点,结合具体案例,分析了“明确标示”、“未改变”、“明知或应知”、“直接获得经济利益”、“通知-删除”规则在司法实践中出现的争议。第五部分：“避风港”规则适用的完善建议。立法移植上的缺陷造成了“避风港”规则在司法实践中的困境,但不能因此否认“避风港”规则制度的价值。通过司法实践中出现的一些问题,笔者提出了完善法律体系、规范法律用语、明确侵权主体分类、规定适当的监察义务等建议。相信通过立法思想、配套法规的完善,“避风港”规则在我国定能发挥更重要的作用。
[Abstract]:In today's society, the network has become an important means for people to obtain information and communicate with foreign countries. The content and form of network service have become various, and the problem of network copyright infringement has become more and more prominent. Since 2000, the network copyright infringement cases related to digital copyright have poured into the courts at all levels. In order to effectively deal with the problem of information dissemination brought by the development of the Internet, China has issued a series of new laws and regulations to solve some problems in the field of network copyright. However, due to the complexity of network infringement of copyright, the current legal provisions are far from meeting the needs of judicial practice, and the existing provisions are still very controversial in the judicial application. Among them, there are many problems in the application of the "safe haven" rules. Starting with the origin of the "haven" rules, this paper summarizes the practical significance of the "haven" rules. Based on the analysis of the exemption clause in Article 22 of the regulations on the Protection of Information Network Transmission right, this paper finds out the defects of the "safe haven" rules in the legislative transplantation and judicial practice, and puts forward some perfect suggestions through these deficiencies. This paper is divided into five parts except preface and conclusion. The first part: the origin and value significance of the "safe haven" rules. The "safe haven" rule originated from the judicial practice of the United States. It was established on the basis of a series of judicial cases and was finally clarified through the enactment of the Digital Millennium copyright Act by Congress. The establishment of the "safe haven" rules has a landmark significance for the protection of network copyright. The second part: the legislative practice of foreign "safe haven" rules. On the basis of DMCA, Germany, European Union and other countries and organizations make their own "safe haven" rules. The "safe haven" rules effectively balance the interests of Internet service providers, copyright owners and the public, and protect intellectual property rights. It promotes the development of Internet enterprises and realizes the win-win of science and technology and law. The third part: the application status and existing problems of the "safe haven" rules in China. This part gives a brief introduction to the legislation of network copyright protection in China. In our country, at present, the law of "safe haven" regulation is "Information Network Communication right Protection Regulation". Although there are still many problems in practice, its position in the field of network copyright protection is unshakable. The fourth part: the analysis of the applicable conditions of the "safe haven" rules. Taking Article 22 of the regulations as the starting point and combining with specific cases, this paper analyzes the disputes arising from the rules of "clear marking", "unchanged", "knowing or should know", "directly obtaining economic benefits" and "Notification-deletion" rules in judicial practice. The fifth part: the perfect suggestion of the application of the "safe haven" rules. The defects in legislative transplantation have caused the dilemma of the "haven" rule in judicial practice, but the value of the "haven" rule system cannot be denied. Through some problems in judicial practice, the author puts forward some suggestions, such as perfecting the legal system, standardizing legal terms, clarifying the classification of torts, and prescribing proper supervision obligations. It is believed that the "haven" rules will play a more important role in our country through the legislative thought and the perfection of supporting laws and regulations.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D922.16

【参考文献】