發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-06 09:47

  本文選題：網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)糾紛 + 著作權(quán)　； 參考：《湖南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的迅猛發(fā)展，對(duì)社會(huì)生活的方方面面產(chǎn)生了巨大影響。隨著互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的普及，上載、下載文件、圖片、軟件等變得越來(lái)越來(lái)容易。網(wǎng)絡(luò)對(duì)政府控制信息復(fù)制與傳播的法律，特別是著作權(quán)法，提出了嚴(yán)峻的挑戰(zhàn)，人們?cè)絹?lái)越關(guān)注著作權(quán)法如何適應(yīng)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的發(fā)展。特別是近年來(lái)，國(guó)內(nèi)網(wǎng)絡(luò)侵權(quán)糾紛案件層出不窮，使得網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)保護(hù)逐漸成為一個(gè)突出的問(wèn)題。其中，百度文庫(kù)侵權(quán)案件一度成為網(wǎng)絡(luò)熱點(diǎn)事件，引起了業(yè)內(nèi)外的廣泛關(guān)注，百度文庫(kù)和著作權(quán)人雙方各執(zhí)一詞，難分高下，如何認(rèn)定和保護(hù)網(wǎng)絡(luò)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)再次成為人們關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)。通過(guò)韓寒訴百度文庫(kù)侵權(quán)一案，分析百度文庫(kù)文檔分享平臺(tái)存在的侵權(quán)現(xiàn)象，對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者的著作權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任進(jìn)行探討，探尋我國(guó)法律對(duì)信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)的系統(tǒng)保護(hù)，以更好地保護(hù)著作權(quán)人的合法權(quán)益和網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者的利益，促進(jìn)我國(guó)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的健康發(fā)展。 首先，通過(guò)結(jié)合案情及法院判決結(jié)果，提煉出兩個(gè)爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)：第一，百度文庫(kù)的身份確定，其性質(zhì)是屬于ICP(網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容提供商)還是ISP(網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供商)，該身份的確定關(guān)系到百度文庫(kù)承擔(dān)侵權(quán)責(zé)任的性質(zhì)，即為直接侵權(quán)還是間接侵權(quán)；第二，百度文庫(kù)能否通過(guò)引用“避風(fēng)港”原則來(lái)免除自身責(zé)任。主要從我國(guó)“信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)條例”中有關(guān)“避風(fēng)港”原則的規(guī)定出發(fā)，探討百度究竟適用“避風(fēng)港”原則還是“紅旗”原則。其次，對(duì)爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)進(jìn)行分析。先從法律對(duì)ICP(網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容提供商)以及ISP(網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供商)的規(guī)定出發(fā)，明確ICP和ISP的概念及兩者侵權(quán)所應(yīng)承擔(dān)的法律責(zé)任，從而確定百度文庫(kù)的侵權(quán)性質(zhì)。再?gòu)姆�律�?duì)“避風(fēng)港”原則的規(guī)定出發(fā)，詳細(xì)闡述了“避風(fēng)港”原則的適用條件，百度公司能否適用“避風(fēng)港”原則免除其責(zé)任。試圖通過(guò)對(duì)這些問(wèn)題的闡述，明確網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)商和權(quán)利人的相關(guān)權(quán)利與義務(wù)，以正確適用“避風(fēng)港”原則，避免該原則的濫用，給今后的類似案例提供借鑒；同時(shí)，也希望能夠加深社會(huì)大眾對(duì)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)立法的認(rèn)識(shí)，，以更好地促進(jìn)網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)的保護(hù)和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的健康發(fā)展。
[Abstract]:The rapid development of the Internet has had a great impact on all aspects of social life. With the popularity of the Internet, upload, download files, pictures, software and so on become more and more easy. The network poses a severe challenge to the law of government controlling the reproduction and dissemination of information, especially the copyright law. People pay more and more attention to how the copyright law adapts to the development of the Internet. Especially in recent years, the domestic network infringement disputes emerge in endlessly, making the network copyright protection gradually become a prominent problem. Among them, the infringing case of Baidu Library once became a hot issue on the Internet, causing widespread concern both inside and outside the industry. Baidu Library and copyright owners both insisted on their own words and could not be separated from each other. How to identify and protect network intellectual property rights has once again become the focus of attention. Through the case of Han Han v. Baidu Library infringement, this paper analyzes the infringement phenomenon existing in the document sharing platform of Baidu Library, probes into the copyright infringement liability of network service provider, and probes into the systematic protection of the right of information dissemination by Chinese law. In order to better protect the legitimate rights and interests of copyright owners and network service providers, promote the healthy development of the Internet in China. First, by combining the facts of the case and the court decision, two points of contention were extracted: first, the identity of Baidu Library. Whether its nature belongs to ICP (Internet content provider) or ISP (Internet Service provider), the determination of this identity is related to the nature of the liability for infringement of Baidu Library, that is, direct infringement or indirect infringement; second, Baidu library can invoke the "safe haven" principle to exempt itself from responsibility. This paper discusses whether Baidu should apply the "safe haven" principle or the "red flag" principle from the provisions of the regulations on the right of Information Network Communication in China. Secondly, the focus of the dispute is analyzed. Starting from the stipulation of ICP (Internet content provider) and ISP (Internet Service provider) in the law, the concept of ICP and ISP and the legal liability of infringement between them should be clarified, so as to determine the infringing nature of Baidu library. From the legal provisions of the "safe haven" principle, the article elaborates the applicable conditions of the "haven" principle, and whether Baidu company can apply the "haven" principle to exempt it from its responsibility. This paper attempts to clarify the relevant rights and obligations of network service providers and right holders through the elaboration of these issues, so as to correctly apply the "safe haven" principle, avoid the abuse of this principle, and provide reference for similar cases in the future. It also hopes to deepen the public's understanding of network copyright legislation so as to better promote the protection of network copyright and the healthy development of the Internet.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 許超;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)立法趨勢(shì)簡(jiǎn)述[J];北京郵電大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年01期

2 田文英,孟娟;網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下的版權(quán)保護(hù)[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2000年06期

3 王遷;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境中版權(quán)直接侵權(quán)的認(rèn)定[J];東方法學(xué);2009年02期

4 王遷;;論版權(quán)“間接侵權(quán)”及其規(guī)則的法定化[J];法學(xué);2005年12期

5 胡開忠;;“避風(fēng)港規(guī)則”在視頻分享網(wǎng)站版權(quán)侵權(quán)認(rèn)定中的適用[J];法學(xué);2009年12期

6 王遷;;《信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)保護(hù)條例》中“避風(fēng)港”規(guī)則的效力[J];法學(xué);2010年06期

7 周慶安;樊哲旺;;百度案與“避風(fēng)港”規(guī)則[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年09期

8 劉晶明;;論“紅旗標(biāo)準(zhǔn)”在認(rèn)定“信息定位服務(wù)”提供者侵權(quán)責(zé)任中的適用范圍[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年21期

9 薛虹;實(shí)行嚴(yán)格責(zé)任原則——網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容提供者的版權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任[J];國(guó)際貿(mào)易;2000年01期

10 吳漢東;;論網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者的著作權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2011年02期

本文編號(hào)：1851837