政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/141822

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/141822

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文筆數/總筆數 : 113313/144292 (79%)
造訪人次 : 50948453 線上人數 : 940

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

搜尋範圍

查詢小技巧：

您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果

若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料

進階搜尋

主頁 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上傳 ‧ 說明 ‧ 關於政大典藏 ‧ 管理

到手機版

政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 科技管理與智慧財產研究所 > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/141822

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141822

題名:	網路服務提供者著作權民事侵權免責條款之研究 ―以歐盟與美國法為借鏡 A Study on Civil Liability for Copyright Infringement of Internet Service Providers: A Comparative Study of Europe, USA, and Taiwan
作者:	莊佩芬 Chuang, Pei-Fen
貢獻者:	宋皇志 Sung, Huang-Chih 莊佩芬 Chuang, Pei-Fen
關鍵詞:	網路服務提供者著作權避風港條款著作權單一市場指令數位服務法數位千禧年著作權法第512條調查報告通知取下通知不再上架 Internet service provider Safe harbor Digital Single Market Digital Services Act Section 512 study Notice-and-takedown Notice-and-staydown
日期:	2022
上傳時間:	2022-09-02 15:43:58 (UTC+8)
摘要:	二十世紀末著作權避風港條款之增訂，明確化網路服務提供者之責任，並為其發展帶來養分。隨著科技發展，網路平台逐漸壯大，儼然成為生活不可或缺的部分，而維持現況下對網路服務提供者較寬鬆之責任限制，是否依舊能有效地在著作權人、網路服務提供者，乃至使用者權利義務之間取得平衡？我國於2009年引入美國著作權避風港條款之規定，近期國家通訊傳播委員會則積極研議增訂「數位中介服務法」，相關政策應如何修正、責任如何分配方為妥適，為本文想探究的問題。歐盟因應數位環境變革，增訂了著作權單一市場指令、數位服務法等規範，重塑歐盟單一市場內網路平台之監管。美國則回應著作權人改革法規之呼聲，發布了著作權局DCMA第512條調查報告。本文進一步研究歐盟、美國法制，比較分析兩國在網路服務提供者類型、通知流程、重複侵權政策以及其他義務規範之異同，並對我國法制提出建議。本文認為我國著作權法應維持現有「通知∕取下」流程，但應調整通知回復機制，並協助發展權利人認證系統。而針對網路服務提供者之監管，本文認為應採取區分監管方式，方能有效因應網路服務之不同特性而有適切之規範，而課予額外義務時，亦應同時注意小型網路服務提供者之保護。 In 1998, the amendment of Digital Millennium Copyright Act established the responsibilities of Internet service providers and thus fostered their development. With the rapid development of technology, internet service providers have become indispensable in day-to-day life. The issue regarding whether the current limited liability framework on internet service providers can still strike a balance between copyright owners, internet service providers and the users arises. This paper would set to analyze and explore the possibility on revising the relevant policies and relocating the responsibilities subject to internet service providers . In response to the changes in the digital environment, EU has adapted the Digital Single Market Directive, the Digital Services Act, aim to reshape the supervision of online platforms in the EU single market, while United States released the DCMA Section 512 report. This paper further studies the legal systems of the European Union and the United States, compares and analyzes the similarities and differences between the two countries, and finally comment on the legal system of Taiwan. This paper argues that the Copyright Act should maintain the existing notice-and-takedown process, but should adjust the notification response mechanism and assist on the development of the right holder authentication system. As for the supervision of Internet service providers, this paper believes that a differentiated supervision method should be adopted to effectively meet the different characteristics of Internet services. Moreover, the size of internet service providers should also be taken into account when imposing additional obligations.
參考文獻:	一、中文文獻（一）書籍翁禮祺（2022），金融科技2.0：數位金融與科技創新，2版，臺北：雙葉書廊。（二）專書論文李治安（2014），網路服務提供者民事免責事由之要件分析，收於：劉孔中主編，國際比較下我國著作權法之總檢討，頁451-490，臺北：中央研究院法律學研究所。馮震宇（2014），歐盟著作權指令體制與相關歐盟法院判決之研究，收於：劉孔中主編，國際比較下我國著作權法之總檢討，頁491-543，臺北：中央研究院法律學研究所。蔡惠如（2011），我國著作權法合理使用之挑戰與契機－以著作權法第65條第2項之判斷基準為核心，收於：黃銘傑主編，著作權合理使用規範之現在與未來，頁183-204，臺北：元照。（三）期刊王怡蘋（2009），著作權法關於網路服務提供者之民事免責規範，月旦法學雜誌，173期，頁25-41。江雅綺、陳俞廷（2021），從電子商務指令到歐盟數位服務法草案-論歐盟ISP責任架構之演變，全國律師，25卷7期，頁31-44。李治安（2014），失衡的承諾：著作權法責任避風港規範之立法政策評析，臺大法學論叢，43卷1期，頁143-207。林利芝（2016），權利消長天平傾斜－探究「通知／取下」程序之平衡假象，月旦法學雜誌，258期，頁39-60。翁逸泓（2022），社群媒體不實訊息之治理—以個資保護模式為選項，收於：李建良編，中研院法學期刊，30期，頁171-230。崔國賓（2017），論網絡服務商版權內容過濾義務，中國法學，2017年2期，頁215-237。章忠信（2009），二○○九年新修正著作權法簡析－網路服務提供者之責任限制，月旦法學雜誌，173 期，頁5-24。許曉芬（2019），歐盟數位單一市場著作權指令之變革，會計研究月刊，406 期，頁96-102。黃銘輝（2019），假新聞、社群媒體與網路時代的言論自由，月旦法學雜誌，292期，頁5-29。鄭嘉逸（2020），網路中介者的「合理」責任避風港義務－由美國最新發展簡評臺灣高等法院100年度上字第752號判決，科技法律透析，32:3期，頁54-60。顏雅倫（2016），雙邊／多邊市場之競爭與創新──論競爭法的因應，科技法學評論，13:1期，頁219-266。（四）網路資料國家通訊傳播委員會，新聞稿：NCC公布「數位通訊傳播服務法」草案架構，盼公私協力共同建構安全、可信賴之網路環境，2021年12月29日，https://www.ncc.gov.tw/chinese/news_detail.aspx?site_content_sn=8&sn_f=46983。國家通訊傳播委員會，新聞稿：NCC公布「數位中介服務法」草案，以網路治理精神共同建構自由、安全、可信賴之網路環境，2022年6月29日，https://www.ncc.gov.tw/chinese/news_detail.aspx?site_content_sn=8&is_history=0&pages=0&sn_f=47684。國家通訊傳播委員會，1101229下午2:00 NCC第996次委員會議後例行記者會，https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoPCZFdTw_o（最後瀏覽日：2022年6月29日）。二、外文文獻（一）書籍 OECD. 2000. OECD Information Technology Outlook 2000. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. 2008. OECD Information Technology Outlook 2008. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. 2010. OECD Information Technology Outlook 2010. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. 2010. The Economic and Social Role of Internet Intermediaries. Paris: OECD Publishing. Stamatoudi, Irini, and Paul Torremans eds. 2014. EU Copyright Law: A Commentary. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. （二）專書論文 Belli, Luca, and Nicolo Zingales. 2017. Online Platforms’ Roles and Responsibilities: a Call for Action. Pp. 25-38 in Platform Regulations: How Platforms are Regulated and How They Regulate Us, edited by Luca Belli and Nicolo Zingales. Rio de Janeiro: Escola de Direito do Rio de Janeiro da Fundação Getulio Vargas. Frosio, Giancarlo, and Sunimal Mendis. 2020. Monitoring and Filtering: European Reform or Global Trend?. Pp. 544-565 in The Oxford Handbook of Online Intermediary Liability, edited by Giancarlo Frosio. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Krämer, Jan. 2020. Introduction. Pp. 12-30 in Digital Markets and Online Platforms: New Perspectives on Regulation and Competition Law, edited by Jan Krämer. Brussels: Centre on Regulation in Europe. （三）期刊 Chander, Anupam. 2016. Internet Intermediaries as Platforms for Expression and Innovation. GIGI Paper 42:1-9. Del Castillo, Aída Ponce. 2020. The Digital Services Act package: Reflections on the EU Commission’s policy options. ETUI Policy Brief- European Economic, Employment and Social Policy N°12/2020. Frosio, Giancarlo, and Christophe Geiger. 2022. Taking Fundamental Rights Seriously in the Digital Services Act’s Platform Liability Regime. European Law Journal Forthcoming. Frosio, Giancarlo. 2016. From Horizontal to Vertical: an Intermediary Liability Earthquake in Europe. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 12:565-575. Husovec, Martin. 2018. The Promises of Algorithmic Copyright Enforcement: Takedown or Staydown? Which is Superior? And Why?. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 42:53-84. Samuelson, Pamela. 2021. Pushing Back on Stricter Copyright ISP Liability Rules. Michigan Technology Law Review 27:299-343. Senftleben, Martin, and Christina Angelopoulos. 2020. The Odyssey of the Prohibition on General Monitoring Obligations on the Way to the Digital Services Act: Between Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive and Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. Working Paper. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=3717022. （四）研究報告 Bertolini, Andrea, Francesca Episcopo, and Nicoleta-Angela Cherciu. 2021. Liability of Online Platforms. European Parliamentary Research Service. Available at https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/656318/EPRS_STU(2021)656318_EN.pdf. United States Copyright Office. 2020. Section 512 of Title 17: A Report of the Register of Copyrights. Available at https://www.copyright.gov/policy/section512/section-512-full-report.pdf. （五）司法判決 BMG Rights Management LLC v. Cox Communications, Inc., 881 F.3d 293 (4th Cir. 2018). Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 June 2021, CJEU ruling in Joined Cases C‑682/18 (Frank Peterson v. YouTube LLC) and C‑683/18 (Elsevier Inc. v. Cyando AG). Viacom International Inc. v. Youtube Inc., 718 F. Supp. 2d 514 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). （六）網路資料 Hooton, Christopher. 2019. Measuring The U.S. Internet Sector: 2019. Internet Association. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3462327. Johnson, Ashley, and Daniel Castro. 2021. How Other Countries Have Dealt With Intermediary Liability. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (Feb. 22, 2021). Available at https://itif.org/publications/2021/02/22/how-other-countries-have-dealt-intermediary-liability.
描述:	碩士國立政治大學科技管理與智慧財產研究所 107364210
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107364210
資料類型:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202201388
顯示於類別:	[科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	描述	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
421001.pdf		2853Kb	Adobe PDF2	0	檢視/開啟

在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

社群 sharing

著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement

1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004 MIT & Hewlett-Packard / Enhanced by NTU Library IR team Copyright © - 回饋