Recently, the court of boshan concluded a dispute concerning the violation of the right to dissemination of works information network filed with the icp, in which company b stated that it had stopped using a website which was used by others to broadcast unauthorized audiovisual works. Because company b did not write off the files of the icp in time to become the alleged infringer. What are the legal points that need attention with regard to the icp filed enterprises? Let's see what the host judge says。
Briefing
Cultural media a is the exclusive licensee of the right to disseminate information networks in a film. In march 2022, company a discovered that an online broadcast service for the film works was available on the abuse website, with company b as the subject of the icp file。
Company a, believing that company b had violated the right of company a to disseminate information about the audio-visual works without lawful authorization, sued the court to order that company b, the defendant, cease the violation, remove the relevant audio-visual works from the site in question, and compensate for certain economic losses and reasonable expenses。
The defendant, company b, argued that the domain name of the site in question had been used by the defendant but had not been renewed since its expiry in october 2021, and that the defendant was not entitled to use the site, except that the information filed by the icp had not been cancelled, and requested the court to dismiss all the plaintiff's claims。
In this case, the defendant was unable to provide evidence to substantiate its claim and agreed to pay the plaintiff a certain amount of compensation. Following repeated communication and coordination between the courts, the parties agreed on the amount of compensation and the defendant had actually complied with it, and the plaintiff applied to the court for withdrawal. At the same time, the defendant filed an icp write-off in litigation。
The main subject of internet information services for the general public via the internet, known as internet content service (internet co)) nentprovider, short “icp”. According to the internet information services management scheme, internet information services are divided into business and non-business。
Non-operational internet information services: filing
Non-operational internet information services are those that provide internet users with open and shared information free of charge. The provision of non-operational internet information services is subject to filing with the departmental, autonomous or municipal telecommunications authorities or with the information industry authorities of the state council。
Operational internet information services: filing + licensing
Operating internet information services are those that provide internet users with information on a reimbursable basis or web site production. The provision of operational internet information services requires a separate licence for the operation of value added telecommunications for internet information services after filing。
Internet information services may not be performed without a permit or due process。
In other words, the provision of internet information services in china, whether operational or non-operational, is subject to icp filing。
The aim of the icp is to prevent illegal activities on the internet and to combat the dissemination of bad internet information. If the website is not filed, there is a risk of being searched or even closed down. The filing entity is required to terminate the provision of services and to comply with the filing write-off in a timely manner with the original filing authority. The icp file amounts to a “real name authentication” of the website, so that the host of the icp file information is by default the actual user of the file domain name. However, since only formal reviews are conducted by the filing authority, the host of the filing icp may not be fully consistent with the actual user of the registered domain name。
The judge's statement
Based on the market demand for corporate development, enterprises often apply for registration or for direct purchase of corresponding domain names for the corresponding network promotion and for the filing of icps in accordance with national legislation. However, if the holding of the domain name is cost-effective and beyond the term is not renewed, the domain name service chamber of commerce reopens the registration or auction of the domain name。
In the present case, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant had been found to be the owner of the site in question and that the defendant had been charged with the corresponding tort liability for the failure to file the cancellation of the case after the expiry of the payment for the domain name in question。
Since many enterprises are outsourced to third-party companies for web site registration, operation maintenance, day-to-day management, etc., the third-party companies have not reminded or assisted the firm to process the icp write-off when the domain name expires. The domain name was repossessed by the others and the information on the icp file was not changed. Using these “forgotten” domain names of businesses, outlaws publish a large amount of information about abuses, leaving businesses at risk of prosecution. In addition, such websites often provide online broadcast services for a number of unauthorized audio-visual works, and filers may face multiple rights-holders ' complaints and claims for compensation。
Therefore, when the domain names held by the enterprise are no longer valid as they expire, write-off procedures should be filed with the relevant departments in a timely manner to avoid unnecessary disputes。
