文献综述格式

石家庄经济学院本科生毕业论文 “论搜索引擎提供者的版权责任”的文献综述

此次论文，我选择了“论搜索引擎提供者的版权责任”作为议题，拿到这个题目，首先让我想到了百度、雅虎、谷歌等著名搜索引擎提供商和人们遇到不懂的问题时会习惯性地用搜索网站去查询答案等等。围绕中国著作权法体系下搜索引擎提供者应该承担的版权责任，我收集了大量的相关资料，主要是专著和期刊论文，其中不乏权威学者的著作。通过对这些著作的学习研究，使我搜索引擎提供者应该承担的版权责任有了更为深刻透彻的理解。下面将对写作过程中参考的主要文献作如下概述： 关于搜索引擎行业现状问题上，艾瑞咨询有限公司在其所作的《2009年中国搜索引擎市场份额报告》中指出，2009年的中国搜索引擎市场规模达到50.4亿人民币，相比前一年同比增长74.1%，蕴含着巨大的市场潜力。但是冯刚在其文章《涉及搜索引擎的侵犯著作权纠纷研究》中也指出这个行业中的一些著名的搜索引擎提供商接连陷入版权纠纷官司，而且判决结果有胜有负。正是该行业一方面生机勃勃另一方面危机不断的现状让我产生了研究兴趣，期待可以通过自己的一些小小研究对解决搜索引擎行业的版权纠纷提出一己之见，通过阅读与分析这两个文献，最终帮助我确定下来论文方向与题目。 搜索引擎提供者应该承担的间接侵权责任方面，王迁在其文章《论“信息定位服务”提供者“间接侵权”行为的认定》一文中作者详细探讨了美国在长期司法实践中形成的间接侵权理论，并对美国著名的“Napster案”中法官如何认定Napster公司间接侵权做出自己的分析。诸如别的学术著作和文章 ：郑成思先生的著作《知识产权法——新世纪初的若干研究重点》、薛虹的《知识产权与电子商务》、王迁的文章《P2P软件提供者的帮助侵权责任》、段维的《网络时代的版权法律保护》等等这些文献资料在关于搜索引擎提供者的版权责任研究中各有侧重。比较而言，主要集中在以下几个问题上：一、我国的搜索引擎行业发展迅速但同时存在着大量版权纠纷，急需对搜索引擎提供者的版权责任做出系统规定;二、现有法律法规对于搜索引擎提供者应承担的间接侵权责任规定不明确，认定标准存在理解偏差，急需统一;三、搜索引擎提供者的避风港规则存在缺陷，不能真正起到减少侵权的作用；四、需探讨法律之外的途径去实现搜索引擎提供者与版权人的利益平衡。通过阅读大量资料，明确争论点之后，文章即从这几个比较具有争议的问题讨论，提出自己的理解意见。 总之，论文的观点看法主要来自于以上著作的启发，通过大量的阅读，本人更加感受到自己知识储备的不足，感受到中国法治之路的艰辛与漫长，作为一个法学专业的学生，深感任重而道远。

石家庄经济学院本科生毕业论文 “论搜索引擎提供者的版权责任”的外文文献 Background Search engine is automatically generated in the web page the user the required information or to provide the information contained in web pages of tools, techniques to help it through a large user of Internet resources in the fastest speed in finding their required information, is an automated capture process using the network resources in order to prepare the query form of online media. With the rapid development of Internet technology, major domestic Internet service providers such as Baidu and Yahoo have launched a powerful search engine business, search engines have become the most important form of online media. But the fortunes of dependency, the search engine providers have been caught in copyright disputes.

U.S. search engine provider for the copyright liability of related

research: The United States in its long-standing judicial practice in the formation of a more comprehensive search engine providers on the indirect infringement liability theory, in the famous Napster case, the judge applied the "contributory infringement" and "alternative infringement" theory of . The recognized standards established Infringement worth learning. The United States in 2000 established the United States, "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" (Digital Millennium Copyright Act, hereinafter referred to as DMCA) first proposed a set of links to the responsibility of the limitation of liability is very effective mechanism, which reflects the major provisions of section 512 in the DMCA section (d), in that "network service provider using information location tool. including catalog, index, signs, or hypertext link, the user guide or a link to the existence of acts of infringing content or site, the network service provider does not assume liability, and in addition to orders outside the Court ordered, do not assume the obligation to stop transmission. "Many well-known foreign scholars believe that this" safe harbor rule "While search engine providers to limit the responsibility of the case, but can not really protect the copyright owner The role of interests. Napster was the verdict by the judge wrote: "We live in a rapidly changing world, on the one hand is the ever-changing technological environment, on the other hand is still holding court," old ", this law to deal with the challenge of technological innovation . the introduction of new technology to traditional markets will always blow, particularly his work has sold through the traditional mechanism for the sale of the copyright people, even more serious. But history has shown, time and market forces total will lead to balanced interests, whether these new technologies, tape recorders, video recorders, or personal computer, Kara OK machine, or MP3 player devices. Therefore, Fa Yuan must be sensible and prudent, not because of abuse to solve Teding of the market, which caused confusion and hastily revised the principle of responsibility, regardless of the surface with a new problem is how the different past.