Has Robin Li solved the problem of Baidu library after being asked to be listed in a broken list?

category:Internet
 Has Robin Li solved the problem of Baidu library after being asked to be listed in a broken list?


Text /Lucia

Recently, the incident that caused a heated debate on the Internet writer Chen Pings application to put Robin Li and his wife on the list of broken promises has again brought peoples attention back to the infringement of Baidu library. This is not the first time that Baidu Library encounters intellectual property disputes. Since Baidu launched Baidu Library in 2009, the issue of infringement of original works has been accompanied by it.

Although Baidu Library has made some changes to try to get rid of the trouble of infringement, it has not fundamentally solved the problem. So what is the reason that makes Baidu Library and writers frequently appear in court? Is the problem of Library infringement really a difficult one to solve?

Crisis and Change

In 2011, Baidu Library, which has just been published for more than two years, had to face its biggest crisis because of intellectual property issues. On that years Consumer Rights Protection Day, Jia Pingwa, Han Han and other 50 writers publicly published Chinese Writers Appeal Baidu Book, accusing Baidu Library of stealing our works, stealing our rights, stealing our property. Because Han Han, Jia Pingwa, Murong Xuecun and other celebrities platform, this book of reprimand quickly spread throughout the network, the mainstream media have also voiced, for a while, Baidu Library has become the target of public criticism.

Yan Xiaohong, deputy director of the General Administration of Press and Publishing and deputy director of the State Copyright Administration, directly commented on the heated Baidu Library incident at that time: Baidu Library is not a good business model. Faced with the enormous pressure of public opinion, Baidu CEO Robin Li even responded at the time, if the management is not good, turn off the Baidu library.

Obviously, Baidu is not willing to shut down this new product with rapid development momentum. But also made some adjustments and changes, trying to get rid of repeated tort trouble.

First of all, Baidu Library conducted a self-examination of the works in the library, completely deleting the unauthorized works in the library.

Secondly, Baidu Library began to actively communicate with copyright parties, and strengthened cooperation with copyright parties.

Finally, the management strategy of Baidu Library has also been adjusted. In December 2011, the optimized version of Baidu Library has reduced the proportion of intellectual property disputes prone to literary and artistic disputes. The main content of Baidu Library is focused on education, PPT, professional literature and application documents. In December 2014, Baidu Library will be implemented as a platform to build Baidu Library from a reading platform into the largest mutual. Online learning platform.

These changes in Baidu Library have also achieved good results. Since the tort gate incident in 2011, Baidu Library has never had a large-scale intellectual property disputes.

At present, Baidu Library Home Page, Education, Applied Documents, Qualification Examinations, Professional Documents and so on become the main content of promotion.

Tort is hard to break, where is the difficulty?

After the tort door, although Baidu Library has made changes, it is only to avoid the heavy, and the loopholes in its audit mechanism determine that the tort of Baidu Library is difficult to eradicate fundamentally.

Baidu Librarys document usage rules are: users need not pay for searching, browsing and sharing in Baidu Library, but when downloading some documents, users need to obtain the full text through exchange, purchase of download vouchers and purchase of VIP access rights. Most users dont like to spend money on download permissions, so they use Baidu Librarys other system, uploading documents, to get download vouchers. Documents uploaded by users will be released in the form of public documents after being audited by Baidu Library (the current auditing mechanism is not yet clear).

However, there is no need to submit proof of the source channel and copyright ownership of the documents uploaded by users in the process of auditing, which provides an opportunity for some users to opportunely use other peoples documents to obtain download vouchers and credits. In addition, users do not have any notices about infringement before uploading documents, but there are little noticeable small-word hints at the bottom of the page that must be read before use.

Therefore, although it is not Baidu Librarys subjective will in many cases, as a provider of network platform services, it also bears an inescapable responsibility for infringement on the platform.

Including intellectual property declaration, exemption declaration, rights declaration and other contents, must read before using Baidu at the bottom of the page marked in a very small font.

In addition, the lack of relevant laws and regulations on the protection of network intellectual property rights and the lack of public awareness of intellectual property rights also condone the infringement of such platforms as Baidu Library to a certain extent.

Although the Copyright Law of the Peoples Republic of China and the Tort Liability Law of the Peoples Republic of China have greatly promoted the protection of intellectual property rights, these traditional laws and regulations are still not specific and clear enough in the face of complex network situations.

The lack of public awareness of intellectual property rights has also made many users unaware of the consequences of their actions after making infringements, which further aggravates the infringement phenomenon on the network platform.

Another important reason why websites such as Baidu Library have no fear of infringement is the so-called haven rule.

According to the Regulations on the Protection of the Right of Information Network Dissemination promulgated by the State Council, if the provider of network storage space does not know and has no reasonable reason to know the infringement of works, performances and audio and video products provided by the service object, and after receiving the notice from the obligee, deletes the works, performances and audio and video products that the obligee deems infringement, it shall not construct. Infringement.

This provision is also known as the haven principle in the industry. But more often, the haven principle will become a shield for website platform providers in the event of infringement disputes. And even if the network platform deletes the infringement works, these works have been posted and downloaded by netizens, the consequences of infringement can not be reversed.

Is the Harbour Rules an umbrella?

In fact, in many infringement disputes between Baidu Library and writers, the haven rule has become an important reason for Baidu Library to defend itself.

For example, in the recent case of Chen Ping v. Baidu, one of Baidus reasons for defending itself is that the hao123 website involved in this case belongs to vertical search, which is formed by Baidu search engines automatic grabbing and program updating. Its technical principles and legal attributes are completely consistent with Baidus natural search. In this case, we should use the principle ofnotice-deleteas a safe haven.

In the case of infringement disputes between Beijing Zhongqing Cultural Media Co., Ltd. and Beijing Baidu Library in 2014, Baidu also defended itself with the rules of interpretation of copyright disputes can not be mechanically applied to the Internet environment, especially to determine the infringement liability of network service providers, which is actually the rules of safe haven.

So is this controversial shelter rule really like the umbrella of the infringement platform?

Whippers consulted Yang Jingan, a partner of Super Intellectual Property Services Co., Ltd., and an expert of the Expert Advisory Committee of the Supreme Peoples Court on Intellectual Property Case Guidance Research (Beijing).

Lawyer Yang believes that according to the relatively clear rules at present, considering that it is difficult for the network platform to audit and judge every uploaded work, if the platform fulfills its corresponding obligations according to the notification-deletion rule, it does not need to bear liability for compensation, this rule is also reasonable. However, there are abuses of this rule by platforms, which need to be further improved according to future developments. Although it is generally believed that the platform does not have the obligation of active review, it should take some measures to avoid infringement, such as prompting and informing users of possible infringement liability when uploading documents. Whether the corresponding management obligations are fulfilled will directly determine whether the platform is infringed and the extent of infringement.

Another expert in intellectual property research who did not want to reveal his name also told whipping bulls: The rules of safe havens are certainly not the umbrella of enterprises. The real problem is not that they are reasonable or unreasonable, but that they are more clear about their provisions.

Without change, Baidu Library will continue to file lawsuits.

In the Internet era, network literature is the general trend. Readers need to use the Internet to meet their needs of convenient and fast-paced cultural consumption. Authors also want to use the East Wind of the Internet to improve the popularity and dissemination of their works. In fact, Baidu Library also hopes that more original writers will be stationed to attract more traffic.

The key is how to find a balance of interests among readers, writers and Baidu Library. The solution of this problem is a touching matter. Legal constraints, platform rules, technical support, user needs, social concepts and other factors should be taken into account.

First, laws and regulations should be improved, and supervision should be in place. In addition to continuing to amend and improve the Copyright Law of the Peoples Republic of China, the Tort Liability Law of the Peoples Republic of China and the Regulations on the Protection of the Right to Spread Information on the Internet, we should strengthen supervision and punish those responsible for infringing property rights on the Internet severely.

Second, the platform should have the determination to eradicate infringement and the awe of intellectual property rights. Strict upload audit system, timely reminder of infringement users, and establish a sound infringement response mechanism.

Third, we should coordinate the interests of users, authors and websites. In fact, there is no fundamental conflict of interest among the three, what is needed is only a suitable mechanism of interest coordination.

Fourth, it is necessary to raise usersawareness of intellectual property rights. This not only requires Baidu Library and other websites to inform and remind users in an appropriate and obvious way in the process of uploading, reading and downloading documents, but also requires the whole society to pay more attention to the protection of intellectual property rights and strengthen publicity efforts.

Writers and Baidu Library are not natural enemies. The website platform brought by the development of information technology should become a win-win business for both sides, rather than a battlefield of frequent disputes.

Baidu Library needs to seriously reflect, face up to the voices of writers, carry out a comprehensive rectification of the website management mode with the determination and courage of strong wrist broken, check the content of the library from the source, coordinate the interests of the website, writers and users, and turn the works of high-quality writers into their own business card rather than trouble.

For Baidu Library, it is not the best choice to evade the accusation of infringement blindly. If we think too much about change, we can make ourselves jump out of the circle of infringement.

Source: Bianews Responsible Editor: Qiao Junyi_NBJ11279