杭州互联网法院成立两周年十大影响力案件汇编（二） | 法宝双语案例
北大法律信息网推出“法宝双语案例”栏目。本栏目选取近期热门司法案例进行双语发布，每两周一期，欢迎关注！感谢新老朋友对北大法律信息网的大力支持，我们会持续为大家提供更好的法律信息服务。本周推送第五期！9月19日已推送《杭州互联网法院成立两周年十大影响力案件汇编（一）》，现推送第二部分。
杭州互联网法院成立两周年十大影响力案件汇编（第二部分）
Ten Influential Cases on the Occasion of the Second Anniversary of the Establishment of the Hangzhou Internet Court(Part Two)
五、杭州某网络科技有限公司诉长沙某网络科技有限公司、深圳市腾讯计算机系统有限公司侵害作品信息网络传播权纠纷案
——微信小程序服务提供者不适用“通知删除”义务
A Network Technology Co., Ltd. of Hangzhou v. A Network Technology Co., Ltd. of Changsha and Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., Ltd.
—WeChat Mini-Program Service Provider Not Subject to the "Notification of Deletion" Rule
(case of dispute over the infringement upon the right to disseminate works on the Internet)
【裁判要旨】
一、腾讯公司微信小程序的法律属性类似《信息网络传播权保护条例》规定的自动接入、自动传输服务。根据相关法律规定及权利义务相一致原则，《侵权责任法》第三十六条“通知删除”规则中“网络服务提供者”应指向提供信息存储空间或者搜索、链接等服务的网络服务提供者，其不适用于提供自动接入或自动传输等基础性网络服务的提供者。因此，以法律规定和客观技术事实为依据，本案腾讯公司作为小程序服务提供者，不适用“通知删除”规则。
二、腾讯公司应对小程序开发者主体信息进行实名认证并予以公布，确保权利人可有效、及时进行维权。而对于重复侵权的小程序开发者，应采取必要的措施防止侵权现象的再次发生，并依托科学合理的管理机制、知识产权保护机制和惩戒机制，在权利保护与技术中立之间保持一定平衡。
[Adjudication Gist]
1. The legal nature of Tencent's WeChat Mini Programs is similar to the auto-access and auto-transmission services as stipulated in the Regulation on the Protection of the Right to Communicate Works to the Public over Information Networks. In accordance with the relevant legal provisions and under the principle of consistency of rights and obligations, the term “network service provider” as mentioned in the “notification of deletion” rule in Article 36 of the Tort Law refers to the network service provider that provides information storage space or search, link, or other services, rather than a provider that provides the auto-access, auto-transmission, or any other basic network services. Therefore, based on the legal provisions and the objective technical facts, Tencent in this case, as a mini program service provider, shall not be governed by the “notification of deletion” rule.
2. Tencent shall conduct the authorization of legal names of mini program developers and announce them so as to ensure that right holders can effectively and timely protect their rights. In addition, necessary measures shall be taken against the mini program developers committing repeated infringements to preclude the recurrence of infringement, and a certain balance between right protection and technology neutrality is expected to be maintained by relying on the scientific and reasonable management mechanism, and the intellectual property protection and punishment mechanisms.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.84175720
[CLI Code] CLI.C.84175720(EN)六、陈某诉杭州某软件服务有限公司网络服务合同纠纷案
——流量劫持、用户Cookie记录隐私与证据开示的司法认定
Chen v. A Software Service Co., Ltd. of Hangzhou
—Judicial Determination of Traffic Hijacking, Privacy Relating to User Cookie Records, and Presentation of Evidence
(case of dispute over a network service contract)
【裁判要旨】
一、通过技术手段强制网络用户访问指定网站造成用户流量被迫流向指定网页属于流量劫持行为，由此获得的流量利益不予支持。
二、用户Cookie记录具备能够单独或者与其他信息结合识别特定自然人个人身份的可能性，属于个人信息。平台向网络用户明示收集并取得同意后，遵循正当、合法、必要、最低限度原则加以使用，未侵犯个人隐私权。
三、格式条款中“平台对用户进行处罚可以不披露依据”之约定，不能免除纠纷成讼后平台的举证责任。
[Adjudication Gist]
1. It is traffic hijacking through which a network user is forced to visit a designated website by technical means, causing the forced redirection of traffic to this webpage, so the benefits resulting therefrom are not supported.
2. The cookie records are personal information on the grounds that it has the possibility of identifying a specific natural person alone or in combination with other information. Where, after explicitly notifying network users of the information collection and obtaining their consent, the platform uses the information under the principles of rationality, legality, necessity, and minimum, such act does not infringe upon the personal privacy.
3. The agreement that the disclosure of the basis for punishing users is not required as stipulated in a standard clause shall not exempt a platform from the burden of proof in a lawsuit.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.84175722
[CLI Code] CLI.C.84175722(EN)七、谢某诉深圳市某科技有限公司、杭州某乙科技有限公司、杭州某丙科技有限公司、北京某文化发展有限公司侵害作品信息网络传播权纠纷系列案
——制作、传播有声读物及“无权而授权”行为的定性
Xie v. A Technology Co., Ltd. of Shenzhen (Company A), A Technology Co., Ltd. of Hangzhou (Company B), A Technology Co., Ltd. of Hangzhou (Company C), and A Culture Development Co., Ltd. of Beijing (Company D)
—Determination of Production and Dissemination of Audio Books and Unauthorized Authorization
(a series of cases of disputes over infringement upon the right to communicate works through information networks)
【裁判要旨】
一、严格对照文字作品原文朗读形成的有声读物，无论其是否添加了背景音乐、音效，都没有改变文字作品的独创性表达，因而不构成改编作品。有声读物作为一种录音制品，是文字作品的复制件。
二、有关著作权授权合同内容发生争议时，应当结合合同签订时的社会背景、合同上下文等因素予以查明，难以查明时应从有利于保护作者利益的角度出发进行解释。
三、缺乏许可制作、通过信息网络交互式提供有声读物，构成对文字作品复制权及信息网络传播权的侵害；上游“授权方”缺乏有效权利而向下授权他人实施受专有权利控制的行为，且行为实际发生的，所有上游授权方均构成帮助侵权，与直接侵权人承担连带责任。
[Adjudication Gist]
1. The audio book formed by reading the original text of the literary work, no matter whether the background music and sound effects are added in it or not, does not change the original expression of the literary work. Therefore, it is not an adapted work but a duplicate in the form of a sound recording.
2. For a dispute over the content of a copyright authorization contract, it shall be ascertained in light of such factors as social background when the contract is signed and contractual context, and if difficult to find it out, it shall be interpreted in favor of protecting the interests of the author.
3.The act of producing and interactively providing audio books through information networks without permission constitute an infringement on the right of reproduction of literary works and the right to communicate works through information networks; and where the upstream “authorized party” lacks effective rights but it authorizes others to commit an act controlled by exclusive rights, and the act is actually committed, all upstream “authorized parties” should be deemed to have assisted in the infringement ,and they should bear joint and several liability with the direct infringer.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.84187549
[CLI Code] CLI.C.84187549(EN)责任编辑：李泽鹏
稿件来源：北大法宝英文编辑组（Mani）
审核人员：张文硕
欢迎扫码获取法宝介绍和试用
OUR VISION
爱法律，有未来
为法律人打造美好的工作体验
| 北大法律信息网 | 北大法宝 |
| 北大法宝学堂 | 法宝智能 |