本文選題：搜索引擎 + “避風港”原則　； 參考：《西南政法大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：近年來迅速擴張的互聯(lián)網搜索引擎所引發(fā)的法律問題格外引人關注,各主要搜索服務提供者近年來都卷入多起網絡侵權官司,激烈的矛盾凸顯出我國互聯(lián)網相關立法的嚴重滯后,我國的互聯(lián)網產業(yè)雖然起步晚但發(fā)展極快,中國的網民數(shù)量已經位居世界第一。作為法律人我們必須要思考我們需要制定什么樣的法律為互聯(lián)網產業(yè)的發(fā)展保駕護航。 文章的第一部分先簡要回顧了搜索引擎的發(fā)展歷程和目前的概括,然后給出美國和中國的立法中關于搜索引擎的定義,并由此引出“避風港”原則,介紹了“避風港”原則的來龍去脈以及在美國和中國立法中的反映,并概述了“避風港”原則的核心條款——“通知——撤銷”程序及對應制度——“抗辯通知”程序。 文章的第二部分圍繞上一部分引出的“避風港”原則,對“避風港”原則在實踐中存在的問題做出了分析,主要包括搜索引擎適用“避風港”原則適格性的悖論以及因此帶來的不確定性,使得“避風港”原則在實踐中可能出現(xiàn)被架空的情況。 文章的第三部分關注的是中外的“避風港”立法,比較全面具體地給出了中國當前的“避風港”立法情況,并與美國的立法比較,反映了我國立法對美國立法的借鑒和吸收,指出了其中的一些不足之處。 文章的第四部分以最常見的文字和圖片搜索為限,結合相關的幾個案例,討論網站及其作品的版權是否會因為被搜索引擎索引而被侵權。 文章的第五部分以當下博弈最為激烈的音樂搜索應用為主要對象,結合幾個影相響力比較大的案例,主要探討提供“鏈接服務”在網絡侵權案件中是否應當被視為“幫助侵權或者共同侵權”以了解我國立法與司法界對這類問題態(tài)度和處理思路的變遷軌跡,揭露司法實務界對“避風港”原則和相關立法精神的理解的偏差。 最后在總結全文的基礎上,指出搜索引擎引發(fā)的糾紛的實質,即“避風港”原則的適用問題,對“避風港”原則在中國司法實踐中面臨的問題做出辨析,指出“避風港”原則對于將來互聯(lián)網產業(yè)發(fā)展的重要性,并對將來相關立法提出一些有益的建言。
[Abstract]:The legal problems caused by the rapid expansion of Internet search engines in recent years have attracted particular attention. In recent years, major search service providers have been involved in a number of network infringement lawsuits. The fierce contradiction highlights the serious lag of the Internet related legislation in our country. Although the Internet industry of our country started late but developed very fast, the number of Internet users in China has already ranked the first in the world. As a legal person, we must consider what laws we need to make to protect the development of the Internet industry. The first part of the article briefly reviews the development of search engine and the current summary, then gives the definition of search engine in the legislation of the United States and China, and leads to the "safe haven" principle. This paper introduces the origin of the "safe haven" principle and its reflection in the legislation of the United States and China, and outlines the "Notification-revocation" procedure and the corresponding system-"Defense Notification" procedure of the "safe haven" principle. The second part of the article analyzes the problems of the "safe haven" principle in practice around the "safe haven" principle introduced in the previous part. It mainly includes the paradox of the suitability of the "safe haven" principle applied by the search engine and the uncertainty it brings, which makes the "safe haven" principle possible to be elevated in practice. The third part of the article focuses on the "safe haven" legislation at home and abroad. It gives a comprehensive and concrete account of the current "safe haven" legislation in China, and compares it with that of the United States, which reflects the reference and absorption of our legislation to American legislation. Some shortcomings are pointed out. The fourth part of the article is limited to the most common text and picture search, and discusses whether the copyright of the website and its works will be infringed by the search engine index. The fifth part of the article takes the most intense music search application in the current game as the main object, combined with several cases of relatively large shadow power. This paper mainly discusses whether the provision of "link service" should be regarded as "helping infringement or joint infringement" in network infringement cases to understand the changing track of attitudes and approaches to this kind of problems in the legislative and judicial circles of our country. Expose judicial practice of the "safe haven" principle and the spirit of the relevant legislative deviation. Finally, on the basis of summing up the full text, this paper points out the essence of the dispute caused by search engine, that is, the application of the "safe haven" principle, and differentiates the problems that the "haven" principle faces in the judicial practice in China. This paper points out the importance of the "safe haven" principle for the future development of the Internet industry, and puts forward some useful suggestions for the relevant legislation in the future.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D923.41

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前8條

1 袁偉;;著作權人發(fā)出要求刪除鏈接的通知時應提供明確的網絡地址——從技術角度淺談《信息網絡傳播權保護條例》第14條第1款第2項[J];電子知識產權;2009年07期

2 左羽;搜索引擎的原理及技術分析研究[J];福建電腦;2005年08期

3 王遷;;提供鏈接與幫助侵權——評“十一大唱片公司訴雅虎案”一審判決[J];中國發(fā)明與專利;2007年07期

4 袁秀挺;胡宓;;搜索引擎商標侵權及不正當競爭的認定與責任承擔——網絡環(huán)境商標間接侵權“第一案”評析[J];法學;2009年04期

5 李曉明;劉建國;;搜索引擎技術及趨勢[J];電腦與電信;2008年05期

6 關永宏;閆慧;;數(shù)字音樂作品著作權保護中的利益沖突與平衡[J];寧夏大學學報(人文社會科學版);2007年06期

7 黃武雙;;論搜索引擎網絡服務提供商侵權責任的承擔——對現(xiàn)行主流觀點的質疑[J];知識產權;2007年05期

8 謝冠斌;史學清;;網絡搜索服務商過錯責任的合理界定——再評“雅虎案”與“百度案”一審判決[J];知識產權;2008年01期

，

本文編號：1808318