Analysis of the German Copyright-Service Provider Act in the perspective of Korean Copyright Law

Yunseok Pak
{"title":"Analysis of the German Copyright-Service Provider Act in the perspective of Korean Copyright Law","authors":"Yunseok Pak","doi":"10.30582/kdps.2022.35.3.123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, some online platform regulations have been the subject of debate regarding Platform Responsibilities in the EU, U.S.A., Korea, and Japan. In 2019, the European Union introduced Article 17 of the Digital Single Market Directive that strengthens liabilities for online content-sharing services providers (OCSSP). First, in the EU, Germany enacted a new Copyright-Service Provider Act to introduce Article 17 whose directive is the OCSSPs’ direct responsibility for communicating copyright-infringing content to the public and to make their best efforts to obtain licenses from the copyright-holder to receive immunity from copyright infringement. OCSSPs must take blocking measures to prevent the continuous upload of copyright-infringing content in the future if the right-holder of the contents informs OCSSPs of the substantial information that copyright infringing content is servicing their platform. The German Act introduced some articles to respond to an overblocking measure of OCSSPs. For example, “Uses authorized by law”, “Uses presumably authorized by law”, “Minor uses”, and “Flagging of uses authorized by law” are introduced to ensure the fundamental rights of service users. In addition, OCSSPs should pay compensation to the copyright-holder and related-rights holder, if works are used for fair use. Compared to the Korean Copyright Act, OCSSPs may belong to a hosting service provider and a special type of online service provider. An obligation to obtain a license, to take notice and stay down, and to pay compensation, is necessary for debating the improvement of Korea’s online service provider immunity regulations.","PeriodicalId":350441,"journal":{"name":"Korea Copyright Commission","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Copyright Commission","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30582/kdps.2022.35.3.123","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recently, some online platform regulations have been the subject of debate regarding Platform Responsibilities in the EU, U.S.A., Korea, and Japan. In 2019, the European Union introduced Article 17 of the Digital Single Market Directive that strengthens liabilities for online content-sharing services providers (OCSSP). First, in the EU, Germany enacted a new Copyright-Service Provider Act to introduce Article 17 whose directive is the OCSSPs’ direct responsibility for communicating copyright-infringing content to the public and to make their best efforts to obtain licenses from the copyright-holder to receive immunity from copyright infringement. OCSSPs must take blocking measures to prevent the continuous upload of copyright-infringing content in the future if the right-holder of the contents informs OCSSPs of the substantial information that copyright infringing content is servicing their platform. The German Act introduced some articles to respond to an overblocking measure of OCSSPs. For example, “Uses authorized by law”, “Uses presumably authorized by law”, “Minor uses”, and “Flagging of uses authorized by law” are introduced to ensure the fundamental rights of service users. In addition, OCSSPs should pay compensation to the copyright-holder and related-rights holder, if works are used for fair use. Compared to the Korean Copyright Act, OCSSPs may belong to a hosting service provider and a special type of online service provider. An obligation to obtain a license, to take notice and stay down, and to pay compensation, is necessary for debating the improvement of Korea’s online service provider immunity regulations.
从韩国著作权法看德国著作权服务提供者法
最近,在欧盟、美国、韩国和日本,一些在线平台的规定一直是关于平台责任的争论的主题。2019年,欧盟引入了《数字单一市场指令》第17条,加强了在线内容共享服务提供商(OCSSP)的责任。首先,在欧盟,德国颁布了一项新的《版权服务提供商法》,引入了第17条,其指令是ocssp有直接责任向公众传播侵犯版权的内容,并尽最大努力从版权所有者那里获得许可,以获得版权侵权豁免。如果内容的权利人向ocssp告知侵权内容正在为其平台服务的实质性信息,ocssp必须采取阻止措施,防止侵权内容在未来继续上传。德国法案引入了一些条款,以应对ocssp的过度封锁措施。通过引入“依法授权的用途”、“推定依法授权的用途”、“次要用途”、“依法授权的用途标注”等条款,保障服务用户的基本权利。此外,如果作品被合理使用,ocssp应向版权所有者和相关权利所有者支付补偿。与韩国版权法相比,ocssp可能属于托管服务提供商和特殊类型的在线服务提供商。就韩国网络服务提供者豁免权制度的改善问题进行讨论时,有必要规定获得许可、注意并保持沉默、支付赔偿的义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信