Research On The Presumption Rule Of Authorship In China’s Copyright Law

In April 2019,the "black hole photo" brought the commercial copyright protection business to the public.Regarding the copyright litigations filed by picture websites,the first thing to be taken into account is whether the websites own rights.In practice,in addition to the evidence chain proofed by the back to back Power of Attorney,the court often takes the watermark of the website displayed on the photo as a form of signature,and confirms that the website has lawful copyright.A series of Supreme Court decisions in 2014 and 2015 recognized the presumption rule of authorship on photographic works,which regarded watermark as the signature,and presumed that the website was the copyright proprietor.However,in the case heard by Hunan Higher People’s Court in 2019,the court put forward the concept of "signature in the context of copyright law",and affirmed that the proprietor cannot be presumed based on the watermark,and the signature thereof should be attributed to the author.From the perspective of legislation,China’s law mainly divides the presumption rule of authorship into two ways.The first way is regard the signature as the author,which is stipulated in the Article 11 of the Copyright Law(2010)and the Guidelines for Hearing Cases of Copyright Infringement issued by Beijing High People’s Court.The second way of presumption is treat the signature as the copyright proprietor or copyright-related right holder,which is stipulated in the Judicial Interpretation of Civil Disputes over Copyright,The Sino-U.S.Economic And Trade Agreement,and the relevant normative documents issued by the Supreme People’s Court and the National Copyright Administration.In practice,the court does not strictly distinguish the distinction between the "author" and the "copyright proprietor",which leads to the problem of granting relevant rights to the unlawful party because of the wrong presumption of the nameThrough comparative law research,I selected several countries on behalf of the author’s right law system,copyright law system and some international treaties,then conducted a comparative study on the provisions related to copyright authorship right,the presumption rule of authorship and related identification sign.It is concluded that the countries under the author’s right system tend to assume the signature belongs to the author,and the provisions of the Berne Convention in "protecting the right of authorship" are consistent with this logic.However,countries under the copyright law system tend to assume that the signature belongs to the copyright owner,and the Form of Notice in the Copyright Convention also points to the copyright proprietor.In conclusion,firstly,after the comparative study of different presumption regulations,the respective law philosophy basis,and the legislative process of China’s copyright law,it is found that China’s copyright law is inclined to be influenced by utilitarianism,and there is no natural right foundation for moral rights as well.However,this does not mean that the protection of moral rights should be attributed to the copyright proprietor according to the utilitarianism.Secondly,there are three pairs of concepts need to be distinguished.The first pair is the signature under copyright law and other laws,which is helpful to make clear that the meaning of signature is different in the Chinese context and in the copyright law.The second pair is the signatures of different subjects in copyright law.The concept of "signature" should be used only for the author of the indicated work,and regarding the sound recordings,performance,etc.,the word "signature" should not be used.The third pair is the signature and rights management information.Only the information indicating the author should be concluded to the authorship,while other information should not use the presumption rule of authorship.Based on the above analysis,in the applicable law,the presumption rules in the Copyright Law is the true presumption rule of authorship,which should be applicable in disputes involving the right of authorship.While the presumption rule stipulated in the judicial interpretation is the presumption rule of right management,which should be combined with other evidence to prove the existence of rights,and the two provisions should be applied separately.Finally,regarding the Article 12 of the revision of the Copyright Law,it should be considered that the corresponding right is existing but not naturally granted to the author.