Research On The Application Of The Rules Of Transformational Use Of Works

In order to balance the interests of copyright owners and the interests of the public,my country has introduced a fair use system in the Copyright Law.The initial fair use determination standard only stipulates 12 special cases.You can use it for identification.However,with the development of society,especially the advent of the digital age,these 12 special situations have been unable to cover many new situations in judicial practice.Therefore,my country has also stipulated the "three-step test of fair use" in the "Regulations for the Implementation of the Copyright Law".In addition,in the Opinions on Giving Full Play to Intellectual Property Judgment Functions to Promote the Great Development and Prosperity of Socialist Culture and Promoting Independent and Coordinated Economic Development issued by the Supreme People’s Court,it stated that the "four-element test can be applied when necessary" This kind of regulation seems to be flexible,but it is also because of the provisions of various identification standards that the rule of "transformative use" of works can never find its applicable position when it is introduced into my country,which is difficult for judges.Provides clear guidance and leads to a variety of "acclimatization" problems in practice.In 2020,my country newly revised the "Copyright Law".In Article 24 of the new Copyright Law,there is still no clear explanation of the "four-element test method" in the provisions on the fair use determination standards.The article clearly states that my country’s fair use determination should apply the "three-step test method" In this context,what problems will arise in the application of the "transformative use" rule of works as a sub-element of factor 1 in the "four-factor test method" in my country,and how to solve these problems,so that the rule can be better Applicability is the main content of this paper.This paper is mainly divided into four parts.The first part is the basic theory of the rules of "transformative use" of works.This part studies the definition and classification of the rules of "transformative use" of works,and compares the deductive works that also contain "transformation" with "transformative use" rules.The difference between "transformative use" works,and the "transformative use" rule is briefly defined.Since "convertible use" originated in the judicial practice of the United States,this part also explains the application and development of the United States.The second part is the current status of the application of the "transformative use" rule of works in my country.This part classifies the cases related to "transformative use",and details the reasons for the judgment of different types of typical cases,and analyzes the current "conversion use".The current status of the application of the "convertible use" rule in my country.The third part is to analyze the current predicament of the application of "transformative use" rules in my country,mainly including the unclear basis of the applicable system,the uncertainty of the scope of application,the unclear identification standards,and the tendency of "convertible use" to replace other identification elements.And other issues.The fourth part is aimed at the problems raised in the third part,and proposes suggestions on the application of the rules of "transformative use" of works,mainly including four suggestions.As the main line,when introducing the "conversion use" rule in this institutional context,it can be used as the principle of "general clauses";the second suggestion is to make the last two steps of the "three-step test" clear The third suggestion is to objectively adopt the double standard of “content transformation” and “function transformation” and subjectively use the perspective of readers in related fields to determine the rule;finally,use the “four The last three factors of the "factor test method" are used to make auxiliary judgments on the identification of the last two steps in the "three-step test method".