广告发布者的著作权审查义务问题研究

A Probe into the Obligation of Copyright Review undertaken by Advertisement Publishers

广告发布者的著作权审查义务,是指广告发布者主动、积极地采取合理措施,审查广告主或广告经营者所提供广告内容的著作权合法性。审查义务与注意义务不同,注意义务仅要求广告发布者谨慎、小心地行为,避免其发布的广告内容侵犯他人著作权。从学理上而言,同时存在公法上的审查义务和私法上的审查义务。公法上的审查义务来源于公法规范,广告发布者的公法审查义务来源于《广告法》中的相关规定。考察新《广告法》的规定可以发现,广告发布者的公法审查义务不包含著作权审查义务。私法上的审查义务来源于私法规范,考察《著作权法》及相关司法解释,广告发布者也不负著作权审查义务,仅承担合理的注意义务。最后在司法上,存在一种危险的判决思路,即广告发布者的公法审查义务影响其私法上著作权问题的注意义务。这种思路实质上使得所有承担公法审查义务的广告发布者在私法上的注意义务都会被提到一个较高的水平,从而使广告发布者陷入"违反公法义务,承担公法责任"和"履行公法义务,承担民事责任"的两难困境。

The copyright review obligation means that advertisement publishers should take initiative and actively adopt reasonable measures to examine the legitimacy of contents provided by advertisers or advertising agents. Review obligation differs from duty of care, which only requires careful and prudent behaviors conceming advertising content to avoid infringing copyrights. Theoretically, there are review obligations both in public law and in private law. Review obligations in public law originate from public laws; and the copyright review obligation of advertisement publisher in public law originates from relevant provisions of Advertising Law. Inspection to the newly revised Advertisement Law shows that advertisement publishers＇ review obligations do not include copyright review obligations. Review obligations in private law originates from private law norms, inspection to the Copyright Law and relevant judicial interpretations shows that they stipulate no copyright review obligations on advertisement publishers, who only need to undertake reasonable duty of care. There is a dangerous judicial logic that advertisement publishers＇ review obligations in public law affect their duty of care about copyright in private law. It increases advertisement 19ublishers＇ duty of care, and out them in a dilemma.