Defining Expeditiousness Of Notice-and-Takedown Concerning IRP Infringements In The Cyberspace

Notice-and-Takedown rule is of great significance for both Internet Service Providers and related rights holders.The current Notice-and-Takedown policy failed to define the expeditiousness of the rule.This article attempts to clarify the response period of Internet Service upon receiving the IPR notice while considering the intention of the legislation,type of the rights,implementation status quo of the rule,and excellent practice experience of countries and regions outside.The determining criteria shall be designed variously according to the different types of the intellectual property rights.Firstly,this article introduces the legislation intents and purposes of Notice and Takedown rule,explaining the basic requirements and its mechanism function,especially the what role “expeditiousness”is playing in this rule.Secondly,it outlines the relevant legislation in China.Problems concerning the legislation are presented,such as the excessive expansion of the rule,flaws of the counternotification rule,and others related to the timeliness of response time.Thirdly,empirical analysis on the judicial cases is adopted to present the status quo of the judicial practice of IPR cases concerning the expeditiousness of Notice-and-Takedown rule.Key and important cases are further analyzed.Comments on the gap between legislation intents and judicial practices and paradox of notice-and-takedown rule and injunction regulation are provided.Finally,with comparative analysis method,legislation status and judicial practices of other countries and regions such as the United States,the European Union,and Canada are introduced to provide reference for China's judicial application.Also,the leading practical experiences of Internet Platform Giant are taken into consideration for establishing the judging standards of “expeditiousness” of Notice-and-Takedown rule.