Research On Infringement Determination About Content Aggregation Platform Provider

The infringement problem of content aggregation platform is different from that of previous Internet copyright infringement.The content aggregation platform provider does not upload the work to its server or other net work carrier,instead,it mainly grabs content from third-party websites through aggregation links and allows users to browse or download them on their own platforms.Content aggregation platforms often provide services to users through deep links and fram ed links.Through the analysis of the classification and behavior pattern of content aggregation platform,according to the idea of copyright infringement,and combining with domestic and foreign typical judicial precedents.It is believed that the law should regulate technologies such as deep links and framed links,but the regulation should not place too much restrictions on them.The implementation of information network dissemination is one of the constituent elements of copyright infringement constituted by content aggregation platform providers.But for the understanding of "providing behavior",there are disputes of "user-awareness standards," "server standards," "substantive presentation standards," "substantive alternative standards," and "new public standards".Adhering to "server standard" to meet the legislative purpose of dissemination of information networks,and it's also a need to balance the interests of copyright owners and other related rights holders and the Internet industry.The operation principle of content aggregation platform requires the application of fault presumption principle to pursue its infringement liability.Content Aggregation Platform Providers often use the Safe Harbor principle as a defense to circumvent their Joint infringement liability.However,the courts throughout our country still have great differences in how to apply the Safe Harbor principle.To end the disputes,we Should combine advanced legislation and judicial experience at home and abroad,and understand the constitutional elements of the principle and the connotation of the "knowledge" and "ought to know" standards correctly.Besides,The notice of non-conformity provided by the right holder shall not be used as the basis for judging the subjective "knowing" or "ought to know" of the content aggregation platform provider.