论文部分内容阅读
在司法实践中,避风港规则的适用主要涉及网络环境下新的维权机制以及网络服务提供者责任承担的问题,相对于迅速和便捷的信息传输方式而言,传统的诉讼模式就显得复杂和滞后,因此需要更加简便和高效的维权模式。避风港规则设立的初衷是为了保护网络服务提供者的发展,最大限度地减轻网络服务提供者审查网站信息的负担。网络服务提供者的性质是企业,其主要的精力应当用于其主营业务的经营,而不是用于审查网络资源是否构成对他人著作权的侵害,因为网络服务提供者毕竟不是司法机关,也不是执法部门,即便是审查初步证据,其能力也是有限的。相对于网络中海量的信息、资源而言,网络服务提供者的审查能力捉襟见肘,如何确定其审查的责任范围,显得尤为重要。
In judicial practice, the application of haven rules mainly involves the new rights protection mechanisms under network environment and the liability of network service providers. As compared with the quick and convenient information transmission, the traditional litigation model is complex and laggard, Therefore, more simple and efficient rights protection mode is needed. The safe haven rule was originally designed to protect the development of ISPs and to minimize the burden on ISPs of examining the information on the Web site. The nature of ISPs is that enterprises should focus their energy mainly on the operation of their main business, not on whether the network resources constitute copyright infringement of others because the ISPs are not judicial organs after all, nor are they Law enforcement agencies, even when examining preliminary evidence, have limited capacity. Compared with the huge amount of information and resources in the network, the network service provider’s censorship ability is hard-pressed. How to determine the scope of its responsibility for censorship is particularly important.