The Limitation on Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation For Internet Service Provider －A Case Study of the United States

• Main Authors: Tsung-Hsun Chen, 陳琮勛
• Other Authors: 蔡明誠
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2011
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/06352455745525809035

碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 法律學研究所 === 99 === The development of Internet technology stimulates the conflicts between the progress of science and culture, and protection of the interests of copyright. In 2009, Copyright Law was amended Chapter VI -1, ”Limitations on Liability for Internet Service Providers”, to demarcate boundaries, controlling the risk of indirect infringement liability which the internet service provider may face. However, owing to the indirect copyright infringement which results from the incomplete legal system and lacks of cases or judgments in Taiwan, it is easy to anticipate that the application and explanation related this issue would face problems and challenges in the future. This is the theme of this paper. In chapter II this thesis discussed the theory of copyright, what is "copyright" and "Copyright Law"? Then it mentioned the observation of the process of evolution in copyright law from history, especially when copyright faced with changes in technology, how did copyright adjust and cope? This thesis discovered that copyright law revealed confrontations among different levels, however, in these confrontations , the magnitude of changes in copyright law were not beyond the line of definite rights – fair use. Thus is “Limitations on Liability for Internet Service Providers” reasonable? This thesis argued that the Internet technology has changed the nature of distribution and reproduce, so the copyright law will need to "qualitative change" in response to technology. Hence if we treat the rule of “Limitations on Liability” as a policy requirement, it is still known as reasonable. In chapter III, this thesis began the case study from judgement of United States before 1998, then introduced the DMCA Section 512, and criticism from contemporary scholars. In chapter IV, I futher explored that the courts how to deal with the explanation of section 512 applied to each case. In sum, the courts extended the space of limitation of liability through explaining the text of section 512, even beyond the original intent of the legislators. In chapter V, this thesis placed the judiciary opinion of United States in our Copyright Act to deal with the controversies we may face in the litigation. In our legal environment, should the courts explain the text of Chapter VI in our Copyright Act? This thesis contrasted the observation of domestic and foreign scholars, discussing the elements of limitation of liability. Finally, because our legal system is incomplete in the structure of indirect infringement liability, the introduction of DMCA would make some conflicts, are such conflicts are contrary to our legal system? how to amend?