Вторник, 12 мая 2015 г.
This follows from the help project, which has prepared the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) at the Court for intellectual property rights.
– Certificates issued by the Court for intellectual property rights on the results of meetings of the Board, form the jurisprudence . If there is a disputed issue of judges, and on the subject issued a certificate, they can be guided by it, – says head of the legal department Coordination Center for TLD RU, a member of the NCC, Sergei Kopylov. – References are not binding, there is no case law in the country. But they form a uniform jurisprudence. To judge once again not to wrestle and use a ready reference.
Prepared to help NCC must approve the Presidium of the Court for intellectual property rights – in this organ are only judges. The press service of the Court did not respond to the request of “Izvestia”, when it is expected to approve this help.
The draft document addresses the issue of the responsibility of so-called information brokers. The definition of this concept is given in Article 1253.1 of the Civil Code of Russia: “The person performing the transfer of the material … the Internet, the person providing the possibility of placing the material or information necessary to retrieve it using information and telecommunications network, the person providing the ability to access material on this network “. As you can see, this definition fall ISPs, hosting companies, search engines, torrents.
The same article of the Civil Code are the conditions under which information intermediary shall not be responsible for infringing material posted by users. The website administration does not know and should not know that counterfeit material. After receiving a written application owner abuse, indicating the exact address of the web, where the material is placed, the mediator “promptly take the necessary and reasonable measures to stop the violation of intellectual property rights”.
The help of the Scientific Advisory Board are three criterion under which an Internet resource can be equated to information intermediaries – and to release from liability.
First, the site should not make a profit from the placement of it pirated file. At the same time, according to Kopylov, discussed in the NCC, which is meant only “direct” profit from the sale of content. In the case of indirect earnings, for example, by displaying advertisements on the page with pirated material, the site can be regarded as information broker.
Secondly, it is necessary to establish who posted the information on a counterfeit site. In the case of an information broker, do people, not the administration of this resource.
Third, the judges recommended to assess whether administration moderates site user uploaded content before it is published. And would not it be such approval, if its introduction is associated with excessive costs.
Now the sites that host user-generated content does not always win in court from rights holders. For example, in December 2014 the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of social network “VKontakte” on the suit LLC “Nikitin Media Digital Content”. It was for the recovery site 750 thousand. Rubles for ten posted by users of phonograms. Social Network challenged in the Supreme Court decision to the Court for intellectual property rights – the decision overturned lower courts in favor of “VKontakte” and sent the case for retrial.
– the document prepared by fixed borders of my liability as owner bloghostingovoy platform – says the head liveinternet.ru German Klimenko.
According to the head of dating site “Teamo.ru” Andrey Burin criteria look quite feasible, given that the formal approval can be.
– Our site has predmoderatsiya content. Moderators can not determine whether the content is legal. But can detect illegal – for example, inciting ethnic hatred, pornographic and so on, – said Burin.
The forum discussed:
No comments:
Post a Comment