Tripartite perspective on the copyright-sharing economy in China

Internet and digital technologies have facilitated copyright sharing in an unprecedented way, creating significant tensions between the free flow of information and the exclusive nature of intellectual property. Copyright owners, users, and online platforms are the three major players in the copyright system. These stakeholders and their relations form the main structure of the copyright-sharing economy. Using China as an example, this paper provides a tripartite perspective on the copyright ecology based on three categories of sharing, namely unauthorized sharing, altruistic sharing, and freemium sharing. The line between copyright owners, users, and platforms has been blurred by rapidly changing technologies and market forces. By examining the strategies and practices of these parties, this paper illustrates the opportunities and challenges for China's copyright industry and digital economy. The paper concludes that under the shadow of the law, a sustainable copyright-sharing model must carefully align the interests of businesses and individual users.     

Jurisprudential Foundation of the Alogithmic Enforcement and Regulation of Law in an Intelligent Society: Taking the Automated Copyright Infringement Monitoring of the Online Content Sharing Platform as an Example

As cyber-space has become increasingly important for human activities, and intelligent algorithms are widely used in cyber-space, we are rapidly entering an intelligent society. Now, algorithmic enforcement and regulations of law have posed non-negligible issues. As algorithmic enforcement of copyright law was introduced earlier than that of other laws, it provides a helpful observation perspective. The worldwide practice of copyright enforcement has gradually departed from traditional “safe harbor provisions, ” and has emphasized prior examination of shared contents uploaded by Internet service providers’ (ISPs) users through the following three dimensions: automated infringement detection algorithms voluntarily used by the ISPs, heavier judicial liability of ISPs, and updated legislation principles. Thus, innovations and development have stimulated new mechanisms and regulations for enforcing copyright in cyberspace. Algorithmic enforcement of copyright law in an intelligent society is essential and meaningful. The copyright regulation mechanisms should be guided by jurisprudential principles and concepts featuring the principles of (a) legitimate and efficient flow of information, (b) balance between and among algorithmic power, public power and private rights, (c) boosting the sharing economy and the new gig economy, and (d) promoting social governance philosophy of “coconstruction, co-governance and sharing.” These principles are meaningful for creation of a new mechanism for balancing interests between ISPs and their users, and for introducing the pluralistic co-governance mechanism beyond simply practicing “filtering obligations.” In addition, these principles are significant for improving a certification with credibility of copyright status and ownership, and for advancing a mechanism for online collegiate-panel dispute resolution.     

论著作权默示许可使用的立法实践

随着互联网技术的快速发展,现实生活中出现了大量的著作权默示许可行为,在著作权立法方面,也出现了对著作权默示许可的一些尝试。不过,无论是以美国为代表的判例法国家在互联网新技术与数字图书馆方面的裹足不前还是我国在《信息网络传播权保护条例》中的浅尝辄止,都不能满足现实中大量著作权默示许可行为的制度需求。著作权默示许可使用可以在不改变现有的著作权法结构的前提下,有效地调和互联网的共享性与著作权的私权性之间的矛盾,因此构建著作权默示许可制度不仅在当下十分必要,而且也将是著作权法发展的大势所趋。     

Cultural Spillovers: Copyright,Conceptions of Authors,and Commercial Practices

Economists, sociologists, and legal scholars agree that intellectual‐property law is fundamental to markets because legal control over copying motivates creative production. But in many markets, such as fashion and databases, there is little or no intellectual‐property protection, yet producers still create innovative products and earn profits. Research on such “negative spaces” in intellectual‐property law reveals that social norms can constrain copying and support creative production. This insight guided our analysis of markets for American literature before the Civil War, in both magazines (a negative space, where intellectual‐property law did not apply) and books (a positive space, where intellectual‐property law did apply). We observed similar understandings of authors and similar commercial practices in both spaces because many authors published the same work in both spaces. Based on these observations, we propose that cultural elements that develop in positive spaces may spill over to related negative spaces, inducing changes in buyers' and sellers' behavior in negative spaces. Our historical approach also revealed nuances—shades of gray—beyond the sharp distinction typically drawn between negative and positive spaces. In the 1850s, a few large‐circulation magazine publishers began to claim copyright, but many still allowed reprinting and none litigated to protect copyright.     

Terms of service and bills of rights: new mechanisms of constitutionalisation in the social media environment?

ABSTRACT

From a cursory look at the terms of service of the main social networking websites, it is immediately possible to detect that Facebook’s show a peculiar configuration. Although they represent a mere contract between private parties, these terms adopt the traditional jargon of constitutional texts and articulate their contents in terms of rights, principles and duties. This curious pairing between norms regulating social media and the constitutional sphere is also apparent in a series of non-binding documents that are unequivocally named ‘bill of rights’ and seek to articulate a set of principles to protect social media users. This paper examines whether the emergence of a constitutional tone in this limited number of texts could be related to the effective, or aspirational, constitutional function that these documents exercise. The identification of a series of significant shortcomings will lead to exclude that social media’s terms of service and bills of rights of social media users currently play a constitutionalising role. Nevertheless, the possibility to theoretically justify the use of these documents as mechanisms of constitutionalisation in the social media environment will be adduced as an evidence of the potential constitutional aspirations of these texts.     

Does private copying need an update in the UK?

Legal context: Most European legal systems have limited the ‘exclusive’reproduction right of authors in their works to enable usersto copy, for private purposes and without the authorizationof the authors, legally acquired protected material. In exchange,authors receive compensation for their loss of control of theircreations. The UK Copyright Act does not generally permit privatecopying, but it does exempt a few acts from the exclusive rightsawarded to authors through copyright. Key points: The article examines the limitations to the reproduction rightprovided by IP law in the UK, such as time-shifting, in thelight of relevant case law—GEMA (1964), Sony v UniversalStudios (1984)—the European Copyright Directive and aEuropean sector inquiry. Many countries have established levieson copying-friendly media where their proceeds are distributedto authors as compensation. This article argues for the needto reform the IP law in the UK, arguing that time-shifting andother reproduction acts authorized by the statute are privatecopying in disguise. The paper only considers legal privatecopying, which should not be mistaken with piracy or file-sharingin P2P networks. Practical significance: Copying another's works in the privacy of one's home has becomeincreasingly popular on account of the fast-developing paceof technology and its supporting platform: the internet. Althoughlevies have often been imposed on physical media (CDs, CDRs),new technologies such as MP3 and MP4 players and USB flash drivesare often exempted, despite their widespread use as tools forprivate copying. The private copying trend is bringing greaterbenefits to the users than to the creators of protected workswho understandably would like to obtain a share of the overallprofits.     

论互联网社交在法治社会建设中的功能

作为一个同法治国家、法治政府相区别的概念,法治社会命题致力于实现社会生活的秩序化、法治化,并尤其强调社会力量对国家法治建设的推动作用,试图借助多元社会主体的参与来型构法治发展的动力基础。准确认识当下的社会状况,充分挖掘现有的社会力量,是开展法治社会建设的正确路径。在当代,互联网信息技术的纵深发展日益改变着现代社会的交往模式,并塑造出互联网社交这一新型的社会关系形态。互联网社交的出现与发展孕育了以网络为介质的社会力量,使社会逐渐获取了同国家对话并参与国家法治建设的能力。互联网社交在法治社会建设中的功能可以从四个向度获得理解:互联网社交缔造着网络公共空间的公民品格;互联网社交孕育了网络社会的自治能力;互联网社交构成了民主参与的"非正式"渠道;互联网社交提供了权力制约的社会手段。     

版权保护与创作、文化发展的关系

将版权的功能等同于鼓励创作,是对现实的过度简化。从作者的角度来看,个体的创作受到多重动机的驱使,版权只扮演着一个相对边缘性的角色。版权更重要的向度是在产业领域,其作用是在媒介稀缺和信息传递依附价值传递的产业环境下,确保知识的大规模商品化得以顺利进行,后者在客观上提高了社会知识的存量和传播范围,同时强化和扩大了作者作为一种职业的地位和范围。当前的媒介充裕和创作传播手段的分散化,催生了大众化创作,并使其成为自媒体时代公众之间重要的对话交流形式。同时,互联网的零边际成本和平台的网络效应与版权相结合,提高了版权人垄断定价的能力和网络版权的市场集中度。版权与文化繁荣的关系,需要在新的信息社会的背景下进行类型化分析。一个宽松的文化发展环境、以产业政策为主导的规模化大市场、低成本的知识要素自由流动以及国家的支持和反垄断介入,是目前我国进一步实现文化发展与繁荣的必由之路。     

Combatting peer-to-peer file sharing of copyrighted material via anti-piracy laws: Issues,trends, and solutions

This article analyses potential end-user copyright violations associated with peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing and the anti-piracy efforts currently underway in order to tackle them. This article discusses international developments in terms of trends, issues and solutions aimed at addressing peer-to-peer file sharing of copyrighted material. First, the article introduces P2P file sharing, its increasing significance in the growing digital media economy, and the legal issues surrounding this topic. Next, the article provides a comparative analysis of global efforts and trends in preventing digital piracy by analyzing relevant legislation, case law and practices in multiple jurisdictions, including the United States, United Kingdom, France, Sweden, and Japan. In addition, the article reviews Hong Kong's current case law and proposed legal reforms including an analysis of their deficiencies with respect to addressing P2P copyright infringement. The article concludes with an analysis of existing trends in preventive measures against copyright infringement through P2P file sharing and suggests directions on future legal and non-legal measures that Hong Kong as well as the international community can take in combating digital piracy and copyright infringement through peer-to-peer file sharing.     

网络环境下私人复制著作权问题研究

在网络环境下,传统著作权法中为个人目的使用作品属于著作权限制的原则开始动摇。网络环境下对待私人复制的态度应以利益平衡原则为指导,在原则上将其纳入合理使用范畴时,给予一定限制。网络环境下私人复制及相关行为应区分不同情况确定其行为性质。为更好地调整因私人复制产生的社会关系,我国应利用《著作权法》第三次修改的大好时机对相关问题进行修改和完善。     

The Representation of Two Competing Visions on the Fundamentals of Copyright: A Content Analysis of Associated Press News Coverage on Copyright, 2004–2009

The importance of the public's understanding of copyright has increased in the digital age, and mainstream media play a significant role in informing the public of copyright law and policy. This study identifies two competing visions on the fundamentals of copyright—the private property vision and the public policy vision—and examines which vision is more predominantly covered by mainstream news media via a quantitative content analysis of Associated Press wire service stories on copyright. The findings suggest that, although the number of sources favoring copyright users’ rights has somewhat increased in the most recent two years, overall the private property vision has been more dominantly covered than the public policy vision in the AP news stories. The study concludes that the mainstream media coverage on copyright needs to move toward a more balanced point where both sides of the debate have an equal chance to present their views.     

网络化社会的戏仿与公平竞争——关于著作权制度设计的比较分析

本文关于戏仿与著作权的讨论,侧重于数码网络化对法律秩序的深刻影响以及各种创新型制度设计。作者认为,对所谓公平使用原则的考量,必须以严格区分美国模式和欧洲模式为前提;中国现行著作权法极其强调对作者人格的保护,固然有其必然性和合理性,但也很可能在不同程度上阻碍信息流通以及文化产业的发展。因此也可以说,“馒头血案”与《无极》的碰撞,其实提出了一些涉及法与社会转型的根本问题:怎样才能避免通讯技术引起著作权的解体或贬值?人际互动与大批量的契约群以及民主决定的法律程序要件之间的关系究竟应该如何重构?解答这些问题的关键是对权利处理的不同方式进行比较。     

Copyright Infringement in a Borderless World - Does Territoriality Matter? Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v Canadian Association of Internet Providers [2004] 2 SCR 427

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Societyof Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v CanadianAssociation of Internet Providers [2004] 2 SCR 427 is significantfor two reasons: (a) the Canadian Supreme Court held that InternetService Providers should be exempted from copyright liabilityas long as they provide only a conduit service in transmittingcopyright materials between Internet users (a point which isconsistent with many national copyright laws); (b) the majorityof the Canadian Supreme Court arrived at the conclusion thatthe appropriate test to determine whether an infringement forthe unauthorized transmission of online copyright material hasoccurred within the Canadian jurisdiction is the ‘realand substantial connection’ test (LeBel J, however, dissentedand was of the view that the correct test to apply is the ‘hostserver’ test). This paper studies these two tests as propoundedby the Canadian Supreme Court and assesses their strengths andweaknesses, especially in light of the territoriality principlein copyright law.     

To share is fair: The changing face of China's fair use doctrine in the sharing economy and beyond

Copyrighted works are greatly entwined with the concept of the sharing economy because of their status as informational public goods. Unlike commercial sharing models that address tangible goods such as bikes and houses, the sharing of which is limited by their physical nature, sharing models for intangible copyrighted works such as Google Books and live game webcasting must account for the comparatively unfettered ability for these to be shared. Accordingly, these models are more focused on exploiting such works to their full commercial potential. However, these sharing models are to a large extent based on the unauthorised exploitation of copyrighted works and will be unworkable if the related copyright issues cannot be solved. The interest that copyright owners have in exclusivity must thus be balanced with the public's interest in further exploitation of copyrighted works. Article 22 of the Copyright Law of China outlines an exhaustive list of copyright exceptions; such a restrictive list is incompatible with the sharing economy. The Chinese courts have realised this problem and have gone beyond the law in their judgments, taking a cue from their US counterparts. However, many of these decisions appear to be inconsistent with one another.To address the aforementioned problems, this paper examines the latest proposed amendment to the Copyright Law of China and proposes several legislative and judicial actions that could help promote the sharing economy. At the legislative level, enacting legislation based on a refined open-ended fair use model is necessary to promote the development of the sharing economy. At the judicial level, Chinese courts should employ the concept of transformative use to correctly interpret legislation based on the proposed open-ended model. With transformative use as the cornerstone of copyright policy, the public gains the freedom to share others’ works, participate in the innovation process, and create works with new value. Moreover, authors would retain an incentive to create works under such a legal regime because market substitution will not occur if a work is used for a different expressive purpose than that for which the work was originally created. Thus, a balance can be achieved between promoting the sharing economy and protecting the exclusivity of copyright in China.     

Legal protection of software—a global view from Japan

An investigation of legal measures for the protection of software reveals a number of important insights into the scope and nature of copyright. Rather than something unique for legal purposes, software and recorded media is actually familiar information. Hence, it is protectible by regular copyright. Regular copyright has two relatively distinct branches, in published and unpublished works. Despite the notion that copyright covers only mode of expression, it is actually applied to protect certain types of information content. As it is so applied, copyright in unpublished works transferred subject to restrictions on the use and disclosure of their information content is equivalent to trade secrecy in the American sense. The nature and scope of copyright is intrinsic and universal wherever it applies. It provides an ideal basis for a much needed international consensus on legal measures for protecting software program interests. It would be needlessly provocative for the USA to attempt to induce Japan or any other country to adopt trade secrecy in the American sense. Japanese support for a new program right as an alternative to copyright probably arose largely out of a lack of understanding of the scope and nature of copyright, especially in unpublished works. As it is applied, copyright generally is unfair competition law in the American sense. Applying it in that light, rather than as traditional copyright, provides wiser treatment of new phenomena that involve software programs, such as copying the structure and format of software programs.     

Players’ rights to game mods: Towards a more balanced copyright regime

In the context of video game, there is a notable convergence between the users and producers of content. There is also a tension between control over created content and innovative uses of that content, which arises from the gap existed between copyright law and the emerging practices of online communities. This paper examines a distinct form of player-contributed content, namely game Mods, through the perspective of social welfare rather than that of content creators. It argues that law is not the only factor affecting copyright owners’ decision-making behavior; social and economic factors also play an essential role. These factors explain why game developers may tolerate or even encourage minor alterations to their works but prohibit total conversion of the Mods. Given that the existing law and terms of service cannot serve as “effective cure” for regulating game Mods, this paper explores the social and economic factors that impact how game corporations address modding, framing these factors in a four-quadrant model according to the relative benefits and harm of Mods to game developers and users/modders. The inconsistency between the letter of the law and its practical application in the modding context suggests a need for law reform. Based on the findings of the above examinations, this paper proposes a two-pronged solution to the modding problem. The first prong concerns the social benefit of game Mods, aiming at changing the copyright regime from being exclusive to non-exclusive, which confers on gamers the legal right to modify video games without permission but obliges them to remunerate the original developers for commercial use of those Mods. The second prong concerns the potential social harm of game Mods and proposes a community-based approach, under which game operators are imposed a common law duty to monitor infringement and to ensure the fair implementation of game developers’ terms of service.     

The Google conundrum: Perpetrator or facilitator on the net? – Forging a fair copyright framework of rights, liability and responsibility in response to search engine 2.0 – Part I: The Google Images Search Engine

Is Google in its quest for search engine optimization through the creation of new technologies, which not only improves its search algorithms but also refines its search functions for users, doing it in a manner that makes it a perpetrator of primary copyright infringement or an invaluable facilitator for Internet functionality? How should the balance of interests in the treatment of creative works be recalibrated in the face of changes in search engine technology and operations, and the disputes that have arisen within the last decade in the context of the digital age and its needs? Using Google as a case study, this paper will look at the two main areas of dispute over the operations of information locator tools and services that either threatens search engine functionality and efficiency or weakens copyright holders’ exclusive rights. It proposes a concerted set of solutions through a reassessment and amendment of copyright law to optimize the social benefits and objectives of both the copyright regime and technological innovations in the electronic model of information archiving, indexing and delivery. A fair distribution of responsibilities and allocation of rights and liabilities will be suggested. In the process, due consideration will be given to both public and private interests, with the former taking precedence; while the recommended solutions will be made within the currently outdated framework for Internet intermediary protection (i.e. safe harbor laws) and exceptions (i.e. specific statutory exemptions and the general fair use defense) under the existing copyright regime. Thus, the proposed changes will be far reaching without being too radical a departure from current law, an evolution that will likely be more acceptable and realistic a solution to the problem.This paper is published in two parts. Part One of this paper will deal with the challenges to the copyright regime posed by the operations and technology behind the Google Images Search Engine, while Part Two that will be published in the subsequent edition of the CLSR will assess the benefits of the Google Books Search Project vis-à-vis the effects it will have on the scope of copyright protection. Recommendations are made to copyright law to accommodate both functions while generally preserving the main objectives of copyright protection.     

Fair Copy: Protecting Access to Scientific Information in Post‐War Britain

This paper extends recent discussions about copyright and the public domain by looking at attempts in post‐war Britain to promote access to scientific information. More specifically, it concentrates on the Royal Society's Fair Copy Declaration (1950) and the related library copying provisions introduced in the Copyright Act 1956, which were designed to protect access to information. While the UK library copying provisions were presented as an expanded version of the Fair Copy Declaration recast in a statutory format, we show that the library copying provisions reflected a specific way of thinking about creation, production and distribution that differed markedly from those that underpinned the Fair Copy Declaration. We also argue that the logic of creation reflected in the library copying provisions shaped copyright law over the course of the twentieth century and beyond.     

How platforms govern users’ copyright-protected content: Exploring the power of private ordering and its implications

Online platforms provide primary points of access to information and other content in the digital age. They foster users’ ability to share ideas and opinions while offering opportunities for cultural and creative industries. In Europe, ownership and use of such expressions is partly governed by a complex web of legislation, sectoral self- and co-regulatory norms. To an important degree, it is also governed by private norms defined by contractual agreements and informal relationships between users and platforms. By adopting policies usually defined as Terms of Service and Community Guidelines, platforms almost unilaterally set use, moderation and enforcement rules, structures and practices (including through algorithmic systems) that govern the access and dissemination of protected content by their users. This private governance of essential means of access, dissemination and expression to (and through) creative content is hardly equitable, though. In fact, it is an expression of how platforms control what users – including users-creators – can say and disseminate online, and how they can monetise their content.As platform power grows, EU law is adjusting by moving towards enhancing the responsibility of platforms for content they host. One crucial example of this is Article 17 of the new Copyright Directive (2019/790), which fundamentally changes the regime and liability of “online content-sharing service providers” (OCSSPs). This complex regime, complemented by rules in the Digital Services Act, sets out a new environment for OCSSPs to design and carry out content moderation, as well as to define their contractual relationship with users, including creators. The latter relationship is characterized by significant power imbalance in favour of platforms, calling into question whether the law can and should do more to protect users-creators.This article addresses the power of large-scale platforms in EU law over their users’ copyright-protected content and its effects on the governance of that content, including on its exploitation and some of its implications for freedom of expression. Our analysis combines legal and empirical methods. We carry our doctrinal legal research to clarify the complex legal regime that governs platforms’ contractual obligations to users and content moderation activities, including the space available for private ordering, with a focus on EU law. From the empirical perspective, we conducted a thematic analysis of most versions of the Terms of Services published over time by the three largest social media platforms in number of users – Facebook, Instagram and YouTube – so as to identify and examine the rules these companies have established to regulate user-generated content, and the ways in which such provisions shifted in the past two decades. In so doing, we unveil how foundational this sort of regulation has always been to platforms’ functioning and how it contributes to defining a system of content exploitation.     

Social networking sites and the legal profession: Balancing benefits with navigating minefields

The purpose of this article is to review the impact of social networking sites on law, the legal profession and dispute resolution. Within a very short period of time, social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace, combined with social networking hardware platforms, such as iPad, iPhone, Blackberry, and Android, have infiltrated the profession of law and dispute resolution. Many legal professionals now have a social networking profile, use information on social networking sites as evidence, and interact with other lawyers and judges through such forums. This increased interaction in a publically accessible and viewable medium presents a challenge to the legal profession's traditional ideas of independence, confidentiality, and rules of evidence. Social networking mediums are here to stay. Therefore, this article looks at how this trend affects law and the legal profession, what issues it presents to lawyers and judges, whether new laws are necessary to take into account the impact of social networking sites and the benefits of such technology in fostering access to justice and helping parties achieve justice.