Determination of Indirect Tort Liability under the Circumstance that the ISP Gains Economic Benefits from Advertisements in Infringing Works in China
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v11i.7506Keywords:
Internet Service Providers (ISP), direct economic benefits, advertisements, infringing works, tort liability.Abstract
According to Chinese law, “directly obtaining any economic benefits” from the works of network users cause network service providers to bear a “higher duty of care” for the infringement acts. However, the standards of “directly obtaining any economic benefits” and “a higher duty of care” have triggered a series of controversies in theory and practice. In terms of theory, this article compares the provisions regarding “direct economic benefits” under the PRC law with the Safe Harbor Rules of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), pointing out the cognitive bias existing in the PRC interpretation of the DMCA. Meanwhile, this article analyzes the determination of tort liability when the ISP gains economic benefits by placing advertisements in infringing works in Chinese judicial practice. The author finds that the standard for determining “direct economic benefits” is relatively vague, and there are issues concerning the direct presumption of fault on network service providers who are found to gain “direct economic benefits” from advertisements in infringing works. These problems often lead to Chinese network service providers being deemed to be liable for damages even though they are doing the normal business of advertising. This article explains the important role of “direct economic benefits” in determining the indirect tort liability of the ISP and how to optimize the rules for determining the indirect tort liability of the ISP in China.
Downloads
References
Provisions by the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Hearing Civil Dispute Cases Involving Infringement of the Right of Communication to the Public on Information Networks, Article 11. 2012.
Regulation on the Protection of the Right of Communication to the Public on Information Networks, Article 22 (4). 2013.
17 U. S. Code § 512 (c) (1) (B). 1998.
PRC Civil Code, Article 1197. 2020.
Cheng Xiao. Tutorial on Tort Liability Law. China Renmin University Press, 2014.
Zhu Dong. The transplantation and variation of indirect tort liability of Internet service providers. Peking University Law Journal, 2019, 31(05): 1340-1356.
Chen Jinchuan. Interpretation of copyright trial principles and practical guidance. Law Press China, 2014.
Pu Min San (Zhi) Chu Zi No.443 Civil Judgment of People’s Court of Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 2009.
Yue 73 Min Zhong No.574-589 Civil Judgment of Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court, 2020.
Yu 0192 Min Chu No.7224 Civil Judgment of People’s Court of Chongqing Liangjiang New Area, 2020.
Pu Min San (Zhi) Chu Zi No.1682 Civil Judgment of People’s Court of Pudong New Area, Shanghai, 2015.
Yu Zhi Min Zhong No.397 Civil Judgment of Henan Higher People’s Court, 2020.
Chao Min (Zhi) Chu Zi No.37655 Civil Judgement of People’s Court, Beijing Chaoyang District, 2014.
E 01 Min Chu No.6743 Civil Judgment of Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court, Hubei Province, 2019.
Yue 73 Min Zhong No.574-589 Civil Judgment of Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court, 2020.
Min Min Zhong No.214 Civil Judgment of Fujian Provincial High People’s Court, 2019.
Provisions by the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Hearing Civil Dispute Cases Involving Infringement of the Right of Communication to the Public on Information Networks, Article 8. 2012.
Wang Qian. Re-examination of copyright infringement on video sharing websites. Studies in Law and Business, 2010, 27(01): 85-94.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.






