Research On The Reasonable Use Of Online Game Live Broadcasting

In the "Netease v.Huaduo Case",the live streaming platform affiliated to Huaduo Company broadcast the online game "Fantasy Westward Journey 2" owned by Netease.The conduct is a defense against the grounds of fair use.The object of reasonable use is the work and its rights.Therefore,first of all,it is necessary to determine the work nature and rights of the online game live object-the online game screen.Online game live broadcasting is not a creative act and the game act cannot fall under the control of existing exclusive rights.This is a drawback of technology legislation.Due to the uncontrollable and leapfrog development of technology,the “propagation right to the public” can be set Non-interactive communication makes the live broadcast of the game fall within the control of the right holder.Live streaming of online games falls under copyright control,providing preliminary conditions for its rational use.Next,we need to proceed from the three aspects of theoretical support,type positioning and measurement standards to verify whether online game live broadcast is a reasonable use.First of all,as far as the theoretical support is concerned,from the perspective of copyright itself,online game live broadcasting can achieve the purpose of balancing personal and social interests.The reduction of originality standards expands the scope of works,so the scope of reasonable use should also be expanded.The social benefits brought by the live broadcast of games can prevent the expansion of the rights holders’ personal interests;from the perspective of economic theory,the reasonable use of online game live broadcasts can reduce transaction costs,alleviate the market failure to give up the use of works due to excessive licensing costs,and reduce waste of resources,To maximize the benefits of the work;from a constitutional perspective,online game live broadcasting can promote and maintain freedom of speech.Online game live broadcasting is a personal interpretation of the game by live broadcasters.This interpretation helps to vent the pressure and satisfaction of real life.Social needs.Secondly,the existing types of reasonable use in China are not sufficient to cover online game live broadcasts.The introduction of convertible use can prevent the disadvantages of reasonable use due to the commercial use of live broadcast and the overall use of game screens,but convertible use cannot be alone Become a type of reasonable use,and should adopt a suitable legislative path,the conversion of use should be included in the "explain the problem" type of reasonable use.Finally,the establishment of convertible use does not equal the establishment of fair use.Therefore,it is necessary to further restrict the convertible use through the in tervention of measurement standards.In this case,the provisions of Article 21 of the Implementation Regulations of the Copyright Law of China can be directly applied.Must meet the "must not damage the normal use of rights holders" and "have to reasonably damage the legitimate interests of rights holders",the former requires online game live broadcast can not replace the online game market,the latter requires online game live broadcast market is not a potential market,Can not cause the loss of the license fee of the right holder.The judgment of the potential market of the game is based on the distinction between live broadcasts of e-sports events and non-e-sports events.Based on the analysis of the reasonable use of the appeal,it can be concluded that the live broadcast of Netease v.Huaduo has a purpose-converted behavior and will not cause Netease ’s economic loss and market replacement,so it is a reasonable use.In the case of Yaoyu v.Douyu,the live broadcast of Douyu Company is "piracy" and is not transferable,so it is not a reasonable use.