The Case Research Of Computer Software Copyright Infringement Litigation Evidene Collection Ways

Computer software copyright infringement litigation evidence collectionproblem began to surface in the 1990s , which is always a hot research topicin the field of intellectual property rights. As the evidence of computersoftware copyright infringement is diversity, technicality, vulnerability andconcealment, to a certain extent, increasing the difficulty of litigants'maintenance of rights, also affecting computer software copyright trial'sfurther development.Throughout the research results of computer software copyrightinfringement litigation evidence collection ways, most of them are written byjudicial practitioners. They study a typical case repeatedly. Their views aremore concentrated, lack of comparative study. Many articles just introduceways of evidence collection, pay less attention to problems when using theways. This paper analysis evidence collection ways in typical cases, studys the legality and rationality of them, and practices with the current judiciary tosubmit new proposals for improving evidence collection ways in such cases.This paper firstly introduces the difficulty faced by computer softwarecopyright infringement litigation evidence collection. Several major evidencecollection ways could be conclude to two, one is by private force, and theother is by public force. The first mainly emphasize the cooperate betweenobligee and notary, involves problems about "trap evidence" and "notarizedevidence"; The second is pushed by the court, the court on application shouldinvestigate, collect evidence, and then preserve them. The followingchapters mainly introduce three typical cases, and discuss the ways ofevidence collection in them, using the research results of current theory andpractice to analyse the problems when using these ways. In Founder v.Gaoshu case, the paper studies three rounds trial conclusions, discusses thelegitimacy and rationality of "trap evidence". Referring to the classification incriminal procedure, "trap evidence" in software infringement cases has beenclassified as "evoked criminal intent" and "provide criminal opportunity".The latter meets the requirements of legitimacy and rationality. In Kangyangv. Hengsheng case, the paper focuses on the cooperate between obligee andnotary, because the role of notary during the process would affect theallocation of responsibilities between two parties. In Microsoft v. Giant case, this paper discusses several aspects about evidence preservation, for example,the review of application, guarantee, range of preservation and executionprocedures, in order to provide reference for the similar cases.Finally, in premise of the balance between justice and efficiency, thispaper gives specific suggestions on how to improve our computer softwarecopyright infringement litigation evidence collection system, in order toeliminate difficulties brought by technology progress, and try to protectcitizen's basic rights from abuse of the intellectual property infringement.