Research On The Application Of China's Safe Harbor Rules

The development of the Internet has expanded the way in which works are copied and disseminated,posing enormous challenges to copyright protection.Because of the inconsistency of the standards of the referee,the United States issued the "Millennium Digital Copyright Act" in 1998 to stipulate the safe harbor rules.In order to promote the development of the Internet industry and clarify the responsibilities of network service providers,China has transplanted the safe harbor rules originating from the United States in the Regulations on the Protection of Information Network Communication Rights.There are many problems in understanding and application.The article mainly introduces the US safe harbor rules and China's regulations.By analyzing the basis of the responsibility of network service providers,it shows that the safe harbor rules are not exempted from liability,but only played a role in clarifying responsibility.At the same time,suggestions were made on the application of the safe haven rules and improvement legislation.The article is divided into five chapters:The first chapter describes the establishment background and legislation of the safe haven in the United States,and states that the US safe haven rules mean the unification of refereeing standards and the elimination of no-fault liability.At the same time,it also describes the legislative situation and existing disputes of China's safe haven rules.The second chapter analyzes that the form of responsibility of the network service provider is the direct tort liability and the indirect tort liability of the copyright.The direct tort liability is the act of being controlled by the copyright law without permission.The indirect tort liability is mainly to help the tort liability and indirect infringement.The act is not controlled by proprietary proprietary rights,and the subjective fault of premise or negligence is premised on the premise of direct infringement.Chapters 3,4 describe the safe haven rules and their accompanying “notice-remove” procedures,and their application in the trademark and patent fields.In the analysis of the provisions related to direct infringement,the provisions related to indirect infringement and the provisions unrelated to the infringement,the safe haven rules are not exempted,and the role is to clarify that they are not responsible under these circumstances.At the same time,according to the basis of the responsibility of the network service provider explained in Chapter 2,the problem of the application of the “Notice-Remove” procedure is explained.The “Notification” is to make the service provider know about the user's infringement,so the notification is not Obligation,it is not an obligation to remove content according to the notice.A notice that does not fully comply with the statutory requirements can be used to judge the subjective status of the service provider.If it is difficult to verify the authenticity of the notice,there is no subjective fault.The last chapter makes recommendations on the legislative improvement of the safe haven rules,and advocates the revision of some of the words,rather than avoiding the deviation of understanding and application,while refining some situations,and balancing the protection of rights and the promotion of industrial development.