Original title: Use the picture to be cautious picture Infringement accounts for the case of the copyright case, Beijing Business Daily reporter learned from the Beijing Internet Court, September 31, 2018, March 31, 2018, Beijing Internet Court received a case 54844 pieces, including 42,121 cases of intellectual property cases, accounting for%.
In civil cases in intellectual property, 4,2080 cases of copyright disputes, accounting for more. What is worth paying attention is that the picture copyright infringement case accounts for more than half of the copyright case.
From the perspective of the subject, the plaintiff is relatively concentrated, mainly for professional pictures, the number of pictures of the previous five companies, accounting for 43% of all pictures cases; the defendants are relatively wide, with the news website organizer, Weibo, WeChat is mainly self-media users.
In practice, the court generally makes a judgment based on the originality of the picture itself, creation difficulty.
"For example, ordinary network users are not strong because of copyright awareness. When they reprint articles from the media, they will use this situation as a map, encounter such situations, and the judge will start from the perspective of balance the rightsman and the interests of the infringement. The single picture of the practice is 300 yuan, up to 5,000 yuan. "Beijing Internet Court synthesisted a trial of a courtier Lu Zhengxin.
Since the media practitioners, Xiao Zhu told Beijing Business Daily: "We do specially pay special attention to the copyright of the picture in the process of editing, because of the situation of the case because the illustration is copyrighted by the illustration."
It is generally to find a picture of the commercial website, which is the kind of business version of the annual payment, or sometimes the news map or the name of the netizen, you can’t contact the source.
Pay attention to copyright, but also to avoid risks. "In addition, the relationship to properly grasp the identification of technology and infringement is also difficult in legal practice.
Lu Zhengxin said that the Beijing Internet Court adheres to the idea of ??"encouraging technology to encourage technical need, maintenance technology, stopping technology to evil". However, upholding technology is not implicitly implicit able to become a block of infringement. "There are many" cases in the case, also selected the top ten typical cases announced. The plaintiff Hunan Happy Sunshine Interactive Entertainment Media Co., Ltd. exclusively enjoy the power of the information network of variety show "singer". But enter and find "Singer 2019" in the search box of the disk, you can get "Related Baidu Cloud Resources Recommendation".
The judge has been tried that the information storage service provided by Baidu network disk has privacy and closure, which is not a proactive review obligation to the network user in the network disk, and after receiving the response notice Disconnect the infringement link, there is no responsibility for the "Notification – Delete" rules. The search link service provided by "a lot" provides an objective link to the infringement link in the network, and will lead to further expansion of the infringement, which has constituted help infringement and should assume infringement responsibility. The final referee defendant compensation for the plaintiff’s economic losses and reasonable expenses totaled 10,000 yuan. Zhuo Wei Law Firm Partner Sun Zhifeng told Beijing Business Daily reporters: "Technical neutral principle is also known as the principle of substantive non-infringement.
When applicable, review whether the so-called technology belongs to the main use of infringement.
The technology is mainly used for normal legitimate business activities, but its technology will be used by the infringent to implement infringement activities. In this case, it is necessary to strictly grasp the conditions of the technical provider to undertake the joint responsibility, only in the condition of help or teaching Take the joint responsibility with the direct infringement. "Sun Zhifeng explained that in the case, the search engine and Baidu network disk belong to substantive non-infringing purposes, and Baidu is exempted because Baidu network disk itself belongs to the private user storage space, and the open search is blocked with the robots protocol. It is not possible to satisfy the effective notice, so it cannot be confirmed that it has the subjective fault with help infringement, so it does not comply with Article 9 of the "Infringement Law" constitutes the requirements, and it is not responsible. There are a lot of techniques to use its technology. The network disk information is open to the way, in fact, the convenience of the infringement link is further spread, so the court decision assumes help infringement responsibility. (Editor: Song Xin Rui, Zhao Guangxia) Sharing let more people see the recommended reading.