Research On The Legal Issues Of Online Video Game Live Broadcasts

With the rise of new technology and new mode of communication,electronic games have developed rapidly in recent years and become an important pillar of our cultural industry.But new things are accompanied by new problems,and the live broadcast of video games is a new problem of intellectual property in the field of electronic games.Due to the large number of problems involved in intellectual property rights,a corresponding legal action has taken place in the weblive of the electronic game network.However,in these proceedings,there has been a complex problem,many find it difficult to answer such as:(1)whether video games can constitute the "copyright law" of the works,in particular,generated when running the game screen,whether can constitute the "copyright law" with similar creation cinematography method works?(2)how should the live platform of the game and the host of the game be located? What is the nature of the behavior of the player and the game host,and has it created a new work?(3)is the re creation of the game works and the legitimacy of the transmission of the game pictures? How to delimit the rights of the copyright owners involved in the live broadcast of the game? Is there a reasonable use system for live games? All these problems are worth studying.Based on the above issues,this article is divided into four sections for the following studies:The main point of this article in the first part is that video games should be classified and discussed.After studying the current judicial practice,this article finds that most parties claiming rights in video games are often the first to seek protection under copyright law.In view of this,this paper believes that in solving similarproblems,it is not possible to adopt a “one size fits all” approach,and that all electronic games can constitute “class movies” or none of them.Instead,it should be based on the nature of the video game itself.From the perspective of case analysis,it can be classified and discussed whether a specific video game can constitute a“film-like work”.Specifically,video games should be classified first according to the storyline,and those games that clearly cannot constitute works of “a kind of movie”and games that obviously belong to “a kind of movie works” should be rejected."Athletics games" draw lessons from foreign judicial experience.In particular,the“fixed standards” adopted by the United States at the present time.Based on the "fixed standards",competitive games have obvious interactivity and therefore cannot be protected as copyright for works.Regarding the specific reference questions of "fixed standards" in our country,although China’s existing legislation does not propose "fixed standards" in the constituent elements of the works,in fact,the "fixed standards" not only conform to the basic logic of copyright law.And the principle has also been applied in the current judicial practice.Therefore,in the judgment of whether competitive games can constitute "a kind of film work",the "fixed standard" is an analytical method worth learning.In the second part of this article,we study the qualitative behavior of the players playing games and webcasting live video games via the Internet.This article believes that,similar to the analysis method applied to the electronic game itself,the analysis of the player’s behavior and webcasting behavior also needs to take a classification discussion.After classifying video games according to “drama standard” and “fixed standard”,this article believes that players’ behaviors of operating strong drama games are similar to playing movies,and do not have any originality,but they are used to broadcast strong drama games through the Internet.The behavior of the screen is also clearly a category of tort.In the context of competitive games,the game player’s behavior of operating video games cannot be characterized as adding original content,and thus cannot be characterized as "creative" behavior.In addition,despite the lagging nature of the copyright law itself,webcasting cannot be classified in anyof the expressly prescribed infringements.However,according to relevant international conventions and current judicial practice,copyright holders can be based on the “other rights” they enjoy.Regulating the webcasting behavior is not controversial.However,in the context of competitive games,the purpose of the live broadcast is not to reproduce the games themselves,but to show the superb operational skills of the game players.In combination with the “transitional use”standard,it should be a fair use behavior.In the third part of this article,the “anti-unfair competition law” was discussed to play a role in the online game of video games.Due to the above analysis,competitive electronic games do not constitute “class movies” under the copyright law because of their interactivity.In addition,even if they think that competitive games constitute works,the live broadcasting platform’s behavior of broadcasting works through the Internet is also a fair use.Category.In view of the fact that the copyright law cannot effectively regulate the webcasting of competitive games,there is also a clear case in the market for competitive games where operators “free riders” take advantage of unfair economic benefits.This article holds that due to the inherent lag in the law itself,there is no specific clause in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law that can regulate the “piracy” and “free rider” behaviors associated with competitive games.However,in the market of competitive games,the live broadcast platform has invested a lot of manpower and material resources in the early stage to obtain the exclusive broadcast rights of the competitive games.In the later stage of the live webcast,it has already become an existing business model through traffic liquidity.The “piracy” behavior of the fighting fish case has affected the related business model,and it has seriously damaged the market’s competitive order and the interests of consumers.Therefore,the“anti-unfair competition law” can be used to regulate the situation.However,in terms of the specific business model for the online game of competitive games,the protection provided by the general provisions of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law is insufficient.Therefore,for the unfair competition behaviors in the live webcast,the correct approach should be based on the improvement and optimization based on aclear understanding of the existing flaws in the anti-unfair competition law system,further amendments to the law,and the establishment of additional piracy.The specific terms of "free rider-style live broadcasting" provide a clear judicial solution to related issues.The fourth part: draw the conclusion of this paper.