Research To P2P's Legal Question

Nowadays, the existence of the large amount of the unauthorized P2P music-sharing strongly impedes the healthy growth of the music industry. In order to alleviate the aggregating status quo, music industry has brought lawsuit against P2P service providers. In US, the liability of P2P service providers falls into two categories, including contributory infringement liability and vicarious infringement liability .This article briefly introduces P2P technology as well as the challenges arising from this technology towards traditional intellectual property rights, then analyses several approaches on how to protect the so-called-network intellectual propertyrights.Finally, the author mentions thedevelopment of P2P technology in China and the relevant Legislation and recommends some concrete ideas to perfect the existing legislation.Commentators and courts have universally hailed the Internet as an abundantly fertile field for self-expression and debate. But this acclamation masks sharp disagreement over whether certain Internet activity should be lauded or deplored. A prime example is the unlicensed use of copyright-protected material. The explosion of sharing and remixing of popular songs and movies over Internet-based peer-to- peer ("P2P") networks like Napster has evoked sharply discordant reactions. Some commentators embrace the ollection, exchange, and transformation of existing works as part and parcel of the individual autonomy, self-expression, and creative collaboration for which we celebrate the Internet. Others denounce those activities as massive piracy of intellectual property. They fear that P2P file swapping poses a mortal threat to the copyright system that sustains authors, artists, and a multi-billion-dollar-a-year industry in the production and dissemination of creative expression.The P2P controversy has degenerated into a steadily intensifying war of words and legal action. The copyright industries have successfully shut down a number of P2P networks and continue to bring lawsuits against others. They have also sought to use Digital Rights Management technology and sabotage to disable unlicensed P2P sharing of copyright-protected works. But these methods do not work well. Commentators and policy-makers have put forth a variety of proposals to address the P2P file swapping controve/sy.In this Article I advance and provide a blueprint for an idea that I think holds themost promise: allowing unrestricted noncommercial P2P file sharing in return forimposing a levy on P2P-related services and products.