| The development of Internet cultural industry,while enlarging the scope of cultural industry spread on the Internet,also has some influence on copyright protection.Under the background of Internet technology,copyright owners are not only faced with the risk of copyright infringement.In essence,algorithm recommendation technology is a kind of information recommendation technology.The personalized algorithm recommendation technology used by network service providers promotes the generation and transmission of short video content on network platforms,and also speeds up the transmission speed of short video infringing content,leading to very serious copyright infringement phenomenon in the Internet and causing some impacts on the relevant interests of copyright owners.The characteristics of network copyright infringement are relatively hidden and widely distributed.In practice,copyright owners are generally difficult to determine the direct infringer,so copyright owners are generally more inclined to investigate the indirect infringement liability of network service providers.At present,there are two ways to solve including judicial proceedings and industrial practices.However,neither of the two methods can completely solve the above problems,so that the copyright disputes of long and short video platforms are in a confrontation state for a long time.In "the First Case of Algorithm Recommendation",the court pointed out that Byte Dance,which provides information storage services,also has information flow recommendation technology,should assume a higher duty of care for copyright than the network service providers that only provide information storage services.The specific research content of this paper is to explore the infringement behavior of Internet service providers using algorithm recommendation technology.The first part,starting from the background of the case,states the basic facts of the dispute between i Qiyi Company and Byte Dance Company about the information network transmission right of Yanxi Palace,and extracts the focus of the dispute according to the judgment of the case,the views of the original defendant and social hot spots.Starting from the focus of controversy,this paper clarifies the existing theoretical or practical disputes in the focus,sorts out the controversial issues,and clarifies the definition of copyright infringement behaviors and their duty of care of Internet service providers under the personalized algorithm recommendation technology.The second part is to identify the ISP’s infringement through algorithm recommendation technology.Firstly,it analyzes the exclusion of infringement,and determines that the use of short videos involved does not constitute fair use by analyzing the meaning and application of fair use rules in copyright.By exploring the meaning and applicable conditions of the safe haven principle under the algorithm recommendation,it is concluded that Byte Dance does not apply the safe haven principle in this case,but the red flag principle should be applied.Secondly,by distinguishing the situations of direct infringement and indirect infringement,and combining with the case,it is determined that Byte Dance in this case knew or should have known about the infringing short videos uploaded by users,and failed to take necessary measures against such short videos,so its behavior is deemed as indirect infringement.The third part clarifies the obligation of network service provider under algorithm recommendation.By analyzing the algorithm recommendation method used by Byte Dance,it clarizes the regulatory obligations and duty of care that Internet service providers should have under the algorithm recommendation,and makes clear that Byte Dance should have a higher duty of care. |
PDF Full Text Request