• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Knowledge Technology & Policy >Toward an Epistemology of ISP Secondary Liability
【24h】

Toward an Epistemology of ISP Secondary Liability

机译：ISP二次责任的认识论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

At common law, contributory infringement for copyright infringement requires "knowledge" of the infringing activity by a direct infringer before secondary liability can attach. In the USA, the "safe harbor" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that shield Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from secondary copyright liability, are concomitantly available only to ISPs that lack the common law knowledge prerequisites for such liability. But this leads to the question of when a juridical corporate entity can be said to have "knowledge" under the statute. Legal institutions have well-established processes for inferring the knowledge state of natural persons, but corporations are complex sociotechnical networks of human and non-human elements whose information state does not map well onto such inferential methods. This question is of course not unique to copyright liability; corporate entities may be responsible for "knowing" actions under a variety of applicable legal provisions, and the question of corporate knowledge is generally under theorized. But consideration of ISP "knowledge" in this context points the way to consideration of corporate epistemology that must be foundational to determining corporate responsibility in copyright protection.
机译：在普通法中，对版权侵权的共同侵权要求先由直接侵权者“了解”侵权活动，然后才能承担次要责任。在美国，数字千年版权法案中的“安全港”条款保护了互联网服务提供商（ISP）免受次要版权责任，因此，只有缺乏普通法知识作为此类责任先决条件的ISP才能使用。但这引出了一个问题，即何时可以说一个法人实体在该法令下具有“知识”。法律机构拥有完善的推断自然人知识状态的过程，但是公司是由人类和非人类元素组成的复杂的社会技术网络，其信息状态无法很好地映射到这种推论方法上。这个问题当然不是版权责任所独有的。公司实体可能根据各种适用的法律规定负责“了解”行为，并且公司知识问题通常在理论上得到解决。但是，在这种情况下，对ISP“知识”的考虑指出了对企业认识论进行思考的方法，这对于确定版权保护中的企业责任必不可少。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号