網路服務提供者侵害著作權之民事責任

Abstract

於網路環境下，民眾得將資訊上傳、下載及儲存，進而促進分享，然未經著作權人授權的電視節目、影集與音樂在其上大量流通，亦使之成為違法、犯罪的溫床。近年有關網路服務提供者之著作權議題已成為各領域的關注焦點，從早期以自律條款之方式，防止使用者違反著作權法，走向由國家立法明文加以規範。自2005年美國最高法院對MGM v. Grokster案作出判決後，世界各國相繼制定有關網路服務提供者的著作權法律規範，我國亦於2007年參考上述判決引進「引誘侵權責任」，訂定著作權法第87條第1項第7款。至2009年，我國再次參考「美國數位千禧年著作權法案」增訂著作權法第六章之一，為網路服務提供者打造一避風港，使其得減少訴訟風險，並免除相關法律責任，以利網路產業發展。然網路侵權手段不斷創新，國際上逐漸出現網路服務提供者應負「通知移除程序」以外的作為義務主張。本文採取比較研究法，觀察我國現行著作權法的法律責任體系，探討網路服務提供者之民事責任及其免責事由間的關係，並重新審視有關網路服務提供者之著作權議題的法制政策，提出以「社會安全注意義務」建立網路服務提供者之作為義務的法制建議，藉此彰顯數位網路時代之特殊規範模式與政策思考，期望平衡網路服務提供者、著作權人及使用者三方間的利益。

In this Internet environment, people can upload, download, store information, and share. However, a large number of television programs, albums and music without copyright owners` authorized, are in a circle, thus make it a breeding ground for illegal and crime. Copyright issues of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are critical to all circles in recent years. Copyright holders used to set up a self-regulatory model to avoid users from violating copyright laws, then turned into statutory laws. After the model of the United States (U.S.) Supreme Court`s case - MGM v. Grokster in 2005, there had been a succession of legislative enactments on the ISPs` copyright liability in many countries around the world. The Taiwanese Copyright Act amended the provisions of “Inducement Rule” in 2007 by consulting the decision of Grokster. Also amended Chapter 6-1 in 2009, establishing a safe harbor for ISPs and reduce the risk of litigation, primarily from the “DMCA” of the U.S. However, the network infringement methods advance, gradually appear a claim that the Internet service providers should be deemed to have an obligation outside the ＂Notice and Take Down＂ through the International. This Article examines the rules in Taiwan Copyright Law from a comparative law perspective and explores the relationship between ISPs` civil liabilities and current safe harbor rules, and reexamine its legal policy on the copyright issues. Moreover, this Article provides ＂Verkehrspflicht＂ to establish the action duty of ISPs as legislative proposals, to manifest the special norms of digital internet and its policy considerations and expect to balance the different interests of copyright owners, ISPs, and their users.