At present, the most important way to spread audio books is to upload them to the network service platform to provide audio books to the public. There are a large number of infringements on the network platform, which can be simply classified according to the identity of network service providers.
In the direct infringement, the Internet service provider uploads the digital format of audio books to its own website as a "content provider" for users to listen or download online at the time and place of their choice, which directly constitutes the infringement of the right of information network communication. It is best to identify direct infringement: 1. Internet service providers have used the Internet to infringe upon the civil rights and interests of others. Internet service providers must obtain dual authorization if they want to legally upload audio books in digital format on their own websites: first, the producers of audio books have the right to copy and disseminate information on the Internet; The second is the information network communication right of the copyright owner of written works. 2. The harmful behavior of network service providers has caused damage. 3. There is a causal relationship between the harmful behavior of network service providers and the damage of victims. 4. The network service provider is at fault. The fault here includes two kinds of mentality: negligence and intention. In fact, it is mostly manifested in the negligent behavior of network service providers in lax review of the information they publish.
Internet service providers can be "information storage service providers" in addition to "content providers", which do not directly infringe the rights of victims, but only provide technical basis and other "help behaviors" for the infringement of information network communication rights. This includes two situations: first, after receiving the infringement notice from the right holder, the network service provider "failed to take necessary measures such as deletion, shielding and disconnection in time"; Second, network service providers know that network users use their network services to infringe on the right of information network communication and fail to take necessary measures. Drawing lessons from the Millennium Digital Copyright Act of the United States and the E-commerce Directive of the European Union, China has stipulated the exemption of Internet service providers in Article 36 of the Tort Liability Act and Article 22 of the Regulations, so as to avoid making Internet service providers bear tort liability without asking reasons and protect their enthusiasm for development.
The second paragraph of Article 36 of Tort Liability Law implicitly stipulates the "safe haven system". This provision includes two steps. The first step requires the obligee to actively participate in the infringement dispute, and the obligation to find and identify the network infringement and notify the network service provider belongs to the obligee, which takes into account the obligee's familiarity with his works and the degree of interests related to the infringement. In view of the fact that copyright is granted in large quantities, it is unreasonable to only allow the right holder to notify, and the infringement may damage the property interests of the licensee more than the copyright owner, so we can consider allowing a specific licensee to notify the network service provider. The second step only requires the network service provider to formally review the notice of the right holder. As long as the notice appears to have the contents stipulated in Article 14 on information network dissemination, necessary measures shall be taken. It is more appropriate to take the notice that does not conform to the form as a factor to judge his infringement consciousness and subjective mentality.