Notice-and-takedown procedures in Ukraine, Spain, China, and the US
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37772/2309-9275-2022-1(18)-2Keywords:
DMCA,, intellectual property, Internet, notice and takedown, unfair competitionAbstract
The purpose of the presented study is to consider the notice-and-takedown procedures presented in the legislation of Spain, China and the USA in the projection of the discussion of their application in Ukrainian realities. To achieve the objective of this study, we have analysed the following documents (as of June 2022): the Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” (Ukraine); the Royal Decree No. 1889/2011, of December 30, 2011, on the Operation of the Intellectual Property Commission (as Amended up to Royal Decree No. 1023/2015 of November 13, 2015) (Spain); the E-Commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China (Adopted at the Fifth Session of the Standing Committee of the 13th National People’s Congress on August 31, 2018) (China); the Regulations on the Protection of Right of Dissemination via Information Network (2013) (China); the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (the USA). The analysis shows that many debatable issues of the procedures are still unresolved, although, for example, China has made a significant step, perhaps too abrupt, but allowing others to learn the practices of the country; Spain has chosen its own path, as prescribed, for example, by the EU Directive on electronic commerce, in many respects positive and revealing, but in some aspects unfinished; the USA got the privilege of being criticized like anyone who has given birth to a new important approach, but at the same time the decision has become truly breakthrough as evidenced by the scale of the procedures implementation beyond US borders; Ukraine is in the infancy of implementing the procedures, but the experience of other countries is definitely useful and applicable in the country to fight unfair competition and support small and medium-sized businesses in difficult economic times.
References
Azmi, I. M. A. G., Ismail, S. F., & Daud, M. (2017). Internet service providers liability for third party content: Freedom to operate?. In 2017 5th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (CITSM) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.
Bar-Ziv, S. & Elkin-Koren, N. (2018). Behind the scenes of online copyright enforcement: Empirical evidence on notice & takedown. Conn. L. Rev., 50(2), 339–385.
Beck, S. E. (2018). Breakout Session: New and Notable in Copyright Law. Presented by Nathaniel Edwards, counsel, Lewis, Roca, Rothgerber, and Christie. Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 2(1), 1–7.
Bleech, A. M. (2009). What’s the Use-Good Faith Evaluations of Fair Use and Digital Millennium Copyright Act Takedown Notices. CommLaw Conspectus, 18, 241–268.
Cobia, J. (2008). The digital millennium copyright act takedown notice procedure: Misuses, abuses, and shortcomings of the process. Minn. JL Sci. & Tech., 10(1), 387–411.
Commission of the European Communities (2003). First Report on the application of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0702:FIN:EN:PDF.
Dong, H. (2020). Balancing the Interests of Trademark Owners and E-Commerce Platforms During the Internet Age. Wake Forest J. Bus. & Intell. Prop. L. 22(3), 371–398.
European Commission (2012). Commission Staff Working Document Online services, including e-commerce, in the Single Mark. Retrieved from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/2d17d3dd-4f004e3c-b75c-98c03b135047/language-en.
Feng, S., Wan, Y., & Fang, F. (2019). Notice and Take Down: How the Shift from Copyright Law to Chinese E-Commerce Law Poses an Unnecessary Disturbance to E-Commerce. IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 50(9), 1082–1100.
Floridi, L. (2021). The End of an Era: from Self-Regulation to Hard Law for the Digital Industry. Philosophy & Technology, 34(4), 619–622.
Frosio, G. F. (2017). From horizontal to vertical: an intermediary liability earthquake in Europe. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 12(7), 565–575.
Gibson, J. (2011). Notice and Takedown, Here and Abroad. The Media Institute. Retrieved from http://www.mediainstitute.org/IPI/2011/091511.php.
Guzman, F. (2015). The Tensions between Derivative Works Online Protected by Fair Use and the Takedown Provisions of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act. Nw. J. Tech. & Intell. Prop., 13(2), 181–196.
Hazelwood Jr, C. W. (2009). Fair Use and the Takedown/Put Back Provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Idea, 50, 307–334.
He, H. (2020). The mechanism for intellectual property protection under Chinese e-commerce law: more powerful than necessary. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 10(2), 217–237.
Ido, V. (2019). Intellectual Property and Electronic Commerce: Proposals in the WTO and Policy Implications for Developing Countries. Policy Brief, (62), 1–8.
Kreiken, F. H. (2017). Large-scale copyright enforcement and human rights safeguards in online markets: A comparative study of 22 sanctioning mechanisms from eight enforcement strategies in six countries between 2004 and 2014. https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:be493008-78cc-46fa-937e-ee7de4559d98.
Kuczerawy, A. & Ausloos, J. (2015). NoC online intermediaries case studies series: European Union and Google Spain. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2567183.
Kwak, J., Zhang, Y., & Yu, J. (2019). Legitimacy building and e-commerce platform development in China: The experience of Alibaba. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 139, 115–124.
Lisovyi, A. & Dmytruk, O. (2020). International Experience in the Prevention of Copyrights Crimes on the Internet. European Political and Law Discourse, 7(6), 103–108.
Loren, L. P. (2011). Deterring Abuse of the Copyright Takedown Regime by Taking Misrepresentation Claims Seriously. Wake Forest L. Rev., 46, 745–782.
Neill, A. H., Karobonik, T., & Balderas, M. (2014). Comments of New Media Rights to the Request for Comments on Department of Commerce Green Paper, Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy. Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Digital Economy. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2480677.
Penney, J. W. (2017). Internet surveillance, regulation, and chilling effects online: a comparative case study. Internet Policy Review, 6(2), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.14763/2017.2.692.
Perel, M., & Elkin-Koren, N. (2015). Accountability in algorithmic copyright enforcement. Stan. Tech. L. Rev., 19, 473–533.
Schonauer, M. (2011). Let the Babies Dance: Strengthening Fair Use and Stifling Abuse in DMCA Notice and Takedown Procedures. ISJLP, 7, 135–169.
Shmatkov, D. (2020). Does Copyright Only Serve the Creative Industries? International Conference on Business Management, Innovation, and Sustainability (ICBMIS). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3709072.
Shmatkov, D. (2021). Copyright Issues in Digital Society: Sports Video Games. In International Intellectual Systems and Information Technologies, 2021 (ISIT 2021) (pp. 291–297).
Shmatkov, D., Hlibko, S., & Georgiievskyi, I. (2021). Approaches to Intellectual Property of Robotics Industry. In 2021 IEEE 8th International Conference on Problems of Infocommunications, Science and Technology (PIC S&T) (pp. 125–128). IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/PICST54195.2021.9772146.
Shmatkov, D., Hlibko, S., Tokarieva, K., & Zagalaz, J. C. (2021). On the Question of Why Copyright Cannot Be Synonymous with Intellectual Property within Digital Competence Frameworks. Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial, 32, 215–231. doi: https://doi.org/10.18601/16571959.n32.07.
Tarkiainen, R. (2021). A comparison of the legitimacy of recent legislative and non-legislative pressures exerted on the EU intermediary liability framework. Retrieved from https://digilabs.global/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Acomparisonofthelegitimacyofrecentlegislativeandnon-legislativepressuresexertedontheEUintermediaryliabilityframework.pdf.
Urban, J. M. & Quilter, L. (2006). Efficient process or chilling effects-takedown notices under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. LJ, 22(4), 621–693.
Wang, J. (2018). Notice-and-Takedown Procedures in the US, the EU and China. In Regulating Hosting ISPs’ Responsibilities for Copyright Infringement (pp. 141–178).
Wang, J. (2021). How to utilize notice-and-takedown procedures in IP enforcement on e-commerce platforms – a lesson from China. Asia Pacific Law Review, 29(2), 243–263.
Wu, X. (2019). Discussion on the Liability of Patent Indirect Infringement on the Network Trading Platform. In 4th International Conference on Contemporary Education, Social Sciences and Humanities (ICCESSH 2019) (pp. 1870–1874).
Zhang, X., & Zhu, X. (2018). A pioneering undertaking to be optimized: legal transplantation and practice of the notice and takedown regime under China’s Patent Law. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 8(3), 191–208.
