Font Size: a A A

On The Safe Harbor Rules Applied To Video Sharing Website In Our Country

Posted on:2013-08-21Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:L ChenFull Text:PDF
GTID:2256330395988150Subject:Intellectual Property Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
Recent years, video sharing industry develops rapidly in China,promoting economic development and information sharing. However,relevant infringements are coming one after another, it is essentialto make corresponding law rules. In China Tort Liability Law and Ruleson the Protection of the Right of Communication through InformationNetwork have been formulated for whatever situation where videosharing websites are can be defined as infringement case in termsof imputation and relief, which guides juridical practice to solvespecific infringement cases. Nonetheless, when introducing foreignrules to China, incomplete understanding of them caused couples ofimperfect and undefined aspects in laws and rules in China. Therefore,it is necessary that law workers in China master thoroughly foreignlegislation and justice practice, and analyze deeply defects inChinese rules and laws. Countermeasures could be taken accordinglyto guide Chinese juridical practice by means of perfectinglegislation.The paper consists of six parts listed as follows.The first part of this paper clarifies the character of the video sharing website, and explores the ultimate reasons of frequentinfringement cases from the concept of the video sharing website,and puts forward the conditional protection to it, namely,“safeharbor” rules, on the base of the rationality of his existence, andanalyzes the significance of the rule. This paper introduce next thedomestic and foreign related justice condition, and compared thesimilarities and differences between countries’, so that, we canfind the ambiguity area in our country’s law, explore and analyzethe misunderstanding and dilemma in our country’s justiceproceeding according to our country’s justice practice.According to domestic and foreign legislation and justicepractice the paper analyzed “safe harbor” rules in China.The second part of this paper explores and discusses theidentification problem about “unchanged” in the “safe harbor”regulation of our country’s video sharing website. According to thetwenty-second paragraph of the “rules”, this paper analyze itsdisadvantages and identify accurately the standard of the“unchanged”.The third part of this paper analyzes the identification problem about the “with no direct benefit” in our country’s “safeharbor” rules. This part firstly explained the definition of the“with no direct benefit " and clarify what’s the “with no directbenefit” so as to solve the difficult problem a of the identificationstandard which is not identified in justice practice proceeding; thenthrough to explore justice practice and American legislation’soriginal ideal about the “vicarious responsibility” which has beencreated in copyright area, and clarify that our country’s“regulation” in the twenty-second paragraph of “with no directbenefit” should not be regarded as one of the conditions ofdisclaimer; last, this part analyze that although “with no directbenefit” is not suitable as a one of the conditions of disclaimers,its significance is still important, so that concluding that itshould be as a one of the video sharing website subjective faultfactors.The fourth part of this paper discusses the identificationproblem about subjective fault in our country’s video sharingwebsite of “safe harbor” rules. This part firstly introduce theacademic dispute about the subjective fault elements which described in our “Tort Liability Law”, and combined with the “Rules”,clarifies that the subjective conditions should be understand as“know” and “should know” in order to better connect correspondingrules of the “rules” and “Tort Liability Law”; then analyzes somemisunderstandings in our justice practice’s proceeding; and finallyanalyze the subjective condition about video sharing website suitby “safe harbor” rules, ascertain the identification standardabout “know” and “should know”.The fifth part of this paper discusses the identification about“notice” rules in “safe harbor” rules. This part firstly pointsout certain courts’ awareness errors in justice practice andsuggests that “notice” should not be considered as the sole wayto identify subjective errors; then compared with domestic andforeign legislation, points out that our country’s “Rules” onformal elements of notice has unreasonable area, and analyze deeplythe reasons; in the end points out that if a notice is not suitableaccording to formal elements of “Rules”, but as long as it satisfythe ultimate element, it is still valid.The sixth part of this paper aims at unperfected area of “safe harbor”, puts forward countermeasures, in hope to bring thelegislation and justice practice well guidance, so as to promote thehealthy development of the video sharing industry and meet theincreasing information needs of public.
Keywords/Search Tags:video sharing website, safe harbor rules, “unchanged”, “with no direct benefit”, subjective errors, notice
PDF Full Text Request
Related items