免费Wi-Fi网络服务提供者的侵权问题研究——欧洲法院TMF诉索尼公司案判决评析  

Free WI-FI Internet Service Providers' Infringement:Analysis of the Case of Tobias Mc Fadden vs. Sony Music Entertainment Germany Gmb H by European Court of Justice

作　　者：杨宇静[1] YANG Yujing(Law School of Tan Kah Kee College, Xiamen University, Zhangzhou 363105, China)

机构地区：[1]厦门大学嘉庚学院法学院,福建漳州363105

出　　处：《重庆邮电大学学报（社会科学版）》2017年第2期64-69,共6页Journal of Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：福建省社会科学规划项目:创新驱动战略下福建众创空间知识产权公共服务能力提升研究(FJ2016C010);重庆市社会科学规划项目:我国信息网络安全现状及其治理法治化研究(2015YBFX099)

摘　　要：欧洲法院审理TMF诉索尼公司案中,初步裁决阶段的助审官明确了免费Wi-Fi网络提供者符合信息社会服务的免责条件,免责的范围包括第三人因版权侵害所遭受的损害以及相关的费用,并且认为简单要求密码保护不能成为适当的禁令。在最终裁决中,法院虽然再次阐明免费Wi-Fi网络提供者符合免责条件,但对于禁令问题作出了与初步裁决法律意见不同的结论,即认为要求商家通过设置密码保护是一项必要的、有效遏制网络侵权的请求。在中国,商家免费提供Wi-Fi进行商业营销的现象较为普遍,因此有必要进一步拓宽网络接入服务提供者的内涵,明确免责后被侵权人应有的救济措施内容以及禁令的合理限制。In the Case of Tobias Mc Fadden vs. Sony Music Entertainment Germany GmbH, the Advocate General of European Court of Justice delivered the opinion that free Wi-Fi provider meets the exemption of Information Society Service and exempts from any claims for injunctive relief, damages or the payment of the costs, meanwhile the simply ordering to secure a Wi-Fi network by password would not constitute an appropriate injunction. The judgment of European Court of Justice reconfirmed that free Wi-Fi provider is not liable for copyright infringements. However, the judgment ruled a- gainst the opinion of Advocate General and held that a password must be considered to be necessary in order to ensure the effectively prevention of copyright infringement. The phenomenon of a shop＇ s offering free Wi-Fi is popular in China. Therefore, it is necessary to further extend the content of internet access service supplier, specifying the content of relief measures after liability exemption and the reasonable limitation of injunction.

关 键 词：免费Wi-Fi网络 信息社会服务 禁令 侵权责任 责任豁免 

分 类 号：D923.41[政治法律—民商法学]