A Study On The Protection Of Audiovisual Works

Article 17 in the amended Copyright Law（2020）replaces the concept“cinematographic works and works produced by a process analogous to cinematography” with “audiovisual works”,and categories them as “cinematographic works and TV serial works” and “other audiovisual works”.Meanwhile,Article 17 applies different ownership rules for audiovisual works,which becomes a highlight of the third revision of Copyright Law.However,there are still many issues with the new rules that have not yet been clarified.Firstly,the law is lack of definition of audiovisual works,its connotation and extension are not yet clear.Secondly,whether it is reasonable to distinguish cinematographic works,TV serial works and other audiovisual works,and the criteria is not clear.Thirdly,in terms of copyright ownership,different ownership rules will lead to different results.This article has four chapters:The first chapter sorted out the relevant provisions and changes of audiovisual works in international treaties and foreign legislation,and summarized the commonalities and differences of audiovisual works.The definitions of audiovisual works in various countries mainly focus on four aspects: expression form,display conditions,fixed elements and requirements of works.This article abstracts the most essential characteristics and clarifies the definition of audiovisual works.The second chapter discussed the classification of audiovisual works.First of all,the article explored the reasons why the legislators distinguish audiovisual works.Secondly,this article analyzed the necessity and rationality of making this distinction.Film and television industries do have their particularities,the number of participants is large and the scale of investment is generally high.But,we also noted that in market economy,many new industries（such as the short video）have access to capital,and the boundaries between traditional film,TV serial works and other audiovisual works have gradually disappeared.Finally,this section attempted to distinguish film,TV serial works and other audiovisual works by three criteria,which are administrative licensing,plot and duration.However,this try came up with a negative result.It is difficult for the current Copyright Law to classify audiovisual works.The third chapter mainly discussed the specific ownership rules for audiovisual works.Among them,the concept of producer is not clear.Legal persons and unincorporated organizations can be producers,and natural persons can also be producers,as long as they can meet the conditions of “organizing the production of audiovisual works and taking responsibility”.In addition,the signatures of the audiovisual works industry are not standardized,and the determination of producers is controversial in practice.Article 17 of Copyright Law distinguishes the ownership rules of audiovisual works.Through legal interpretation,the agreements between the parties will have different effects on the two types of works,which will seriously affect other audiovisual works’ safety and efficiency in their outward licensing.In the fourth chapter,after the revision of Copyright Law,the definition of audiovisual works should catch the world trend and be updated in time.This paper attempts to distinguish them by two elements: creation method and investment amount.Regarding the ownership of the copyright of audiovisual works,the standards for the identification of producers should be standardized.In order to ensure the transaction security of other audiovisual works,we can use “presumptive transfer” model for reference and presume the producer enjoys the copyright property rights.