Literature have finally Fangshuiyangyu to go to the net fishing, and December 17, Shanda Literature said that Baidu search bar there, and paste a large number of online literary piracy, and these networks had exclusive rights to a grand literary authors literature. Alleged that a grand network of five novels will, to raise millions Baidu level of compensation request, the parties may wish to comment on this article started Glimpse of some of the legal offensive and defensive.

 

Keywords:

Red Flag Rules of the principle of grand haven Baidu

 

Text:

Shanda and Baidu, the Internet age two giants, one doing interactive entertainment, and a search engine to do both in this there is no intersection, but at the end of 2009 ready to begin fighting hand to hand, this is still both playing the copyright card.

   

I wish to comment on the parties to the legal analysis of offensive and defensive, and Aspect is as follows:

1, Shanda Literature

As the opportunities to master the proceedings, grand literature may be placed in the Shanghai Pudong court proceedings will be conducted in order to seize the geographical advantage.

By then, the grand literature, the evidence submitted material may be, 1, to prove the rights of copyright owners and the rights of copyright authorization of a grand literary power of attorney; 2, Shanda Literature requires Baidu broken links and paste bar infringing content infringement notice; 3, the preservation of evidence of infringing web pages certificate 4, the loss calculated on the basis of copyright

Shanda will be based on "Information Network Transmission Right Protection Ordinance" and the network of the Supreme Court to present its judicial interpretation of copyright lawsuits claim that the grand in the media of communication will be in the United States has always advocated the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act," the principle of the so-called red flag, "when apparent violations to the same as the bright red, even the average person can see at a glance, the network service providers can no longer turn a blind eye can not, should take to monitor, delete, remove the obligation. "" Information Network Transmission Right Protection Ordinance "Article 23 draws in part on the principle of the contents of the red flag, which states that "network service provider for the service object to provide search, or link services in receipt of a notice of rights holders, according to the provisions of this Ordinance disconnect infringing works, performances, audio-visual products, links, and assumes no liability; however, knows or should know the link works, performances, audio-visual products infringement, contributory infringement shall bear the responsibility.. "

 

Second, Baidu

Baidu sued will be divided into two parts:

1, the search engine

Ranking as a tool for Chinese search, Baidu accordance with the above regulations and judicial interpretations of the provisions of the rights of people receiving a qualified notice, should disconnect the link with the infringing page, otherwise, would constitute contributory infringement.

2, paste Bar

Baidu paste created by the bar is a user-interactive format, users can paste after registration opened a bar and to publish the text in which the pictures and even video and audio content. More like a bar posted by Baidu provides users a high degree of freedom of space, then for such a form, whether Baidu paste bar knew or should have known of the content? In my opinion, it should be reference to the foregoing, the rights of people subject to notification of appropriate grid.

Baidu's defense of the rationale