Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Examination of Fan Activities Under Current Legal Frameworks of the United States, China, and Japan

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Copyright and Fan Productivity in China

  • 691 Accesses

Abstract

Before delving into the options for addressing problems raised by fan activities in the digital age and looking for answers on how to achieve the “delicate balance” that scholars are yearning for in designing our copyright laws, it is useful to go through the laws related to fan activities, both internationally and domestically, and see whether these fan activities are infringing or not under the law, and what else can be deduced from doing so.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Rudolf von Jhering, Der Geist des römischen Rechts 8–9 (1955, vol. 1).

  2. 2.

    Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances (adopted by the Diplomatic Conference on the Protection of Audiovisual Performances in Beijing, on June 24, 2012). China ratified in 2014.

  3. 3.

    UCC, art. II (1); Berne Convention, art. 5(1); Beijing Treaty, art. 4.

  4. 4.

    UCC, Art. IV bis; Berne Convention, art. 9(2); Beijing Treaty, art. 13; TRIPS Agreement, art. 13.

  5. 5.

    Mike Masnick, WIPO is Quietly Signing an Agreement to Give Hollywood Stars Their Own Special Version of Copyright, Techdirt, Jun. 26, 2012, at https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120625/20471219474/wipo-is-quietly-signing-agreement-to-give-hollywood-stars-their-own-special-version-copyright.shtml.

  6. 6.

    Berne Convention, art. 9(2) (“It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.”).

  7. 7.

    See generally, He, supra note 123 in Chap. 2; see also Kirkpatrick, supra note 27 in Chap. 1, at 145.

  8. 8.

    See supra Sect. 2.2.1 Challenges to the Copyright System and Chap. 3.

  9. 9.

    According to the official responses of F. Teeven, the State secretary of Safety and Justice of the Netherlands, to the questions raised by the member Oosenbrug (PvdA) of the House concerning the subtitling of films as copyright infringement, fansub as a topic is also highly debated on the parliamentary level in the Netherlands as well. The answers, however, are in favor of copyright owners. See Antwoorden kamervragen over ondertitelen van films als inbreuk op auteursrecht, rijksoverheid.nl, Dec. 19, 2013, at http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documenten-en-publicaties/kamerstukken/2013/12/20/antwoorden-kamervragen-over-ondertitelen-van-films-als-inbreuk-op-auteursrecht/lp-v-j-0000004746.pdf.

  10. 10.

    Although some argue that “fansubs and illegal video downloading sites have had a deleterious effect on the anime industry, despite fans’ attempts to suggest fansubs promote the industry”, for new markets “that have not yet gained recognition” like China, “illegal uses may be beneficial”. See Lee, supra note 401   in Chap. 3, at 187–188.

  11. 11.

    See Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 230 (“… granting permission might thwart the incentive of said syndications to be the first to bring the shows to the public.”).

  12. 12.

    See Mikhail Koulikov, ADV films, Anime News Network, May. 12, 2007, http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2007/anime-central/advfilms (“…fan subtitling is hurting the industry both in the U.S. and in Japan.”).

  13. 13.

    Y. Tian, Fansub Cyber Culture in China (Apr. 26, 2011) (unpublished M.A. thesis, Georgetown University, UMI No. 1491553), available by subscription in ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database, http://search.proquest.com/docview/865649108?accountid=12339.

  14. 14.

    17 U.S.C § 101(2012) (A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.).

  15. 15.

    17 U.S.C § 103(a) (2012).

  16. 16.

    For more detailed discussion on this, please see infra Sect. 5.2.3 Part II: The Copyright Law of China in the Near Future.

  17. 17.

    Many researches give a negative result when they run the fansubs through the four-factor fair use test. The four factors the U.S. judges will consider are: the purpose and character of your use; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion taken; and the effect of the use upon the potential market. See Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 248; See also Rembert-Lang, supra note 24 in Chap. 1, at 31; Daniels, supra note 25 in Chap. 1, at 735.

  18. 18.

    Stewart v. Abend, 495 U.S. 207, 237 (1990); Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 455 n. 40 (1984).

  19. 19.

    Nihon keizai Shimbun Inc. v. Comline Bus Data Inc. 166 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 1999).

  20. 20.

    Japanese Copyright Law, art. 2(xi) (“derivative work means a work created by translating, arranging musically, transforming, or dramatizing, cinematizing or otherwise adapting a pre-existing work”).

  21. 21.

    Id. art. 11.

  22. 22.

    Id. art. 30–50.

  23. 23.

    See Japanese Copyright Law, art. 43.

  24. 24.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 12.

  25. 25.

    Id. art. 10(15).

  26. 26.

    Id. art. 12.

  27. 27.

    Creemers, supra note 128 in Chap. 3, at 570.

  28. 28.

    See Wenjie Jin (金文婕), Meiju Zimuzu Bei Shoubian Huo Leifeng Yao Zhuanqian (美剧字幕组被收编 “活雷锋”要赚钱) [Fansub Groups of American Drama were Incorporated, “Living Lei Feng” Needs Money], Xinwen Chenbao (新闻晨报) [Shanghai Morning Post], Jun. 16, 2014, http://www.jfdaily.com/shanghai/bw/201406/t20140616_448050.html (China).

  29. 29.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 22. It provides:

    • In the following cases, a work may be used without permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work are mentioned and the other rights enjoyed by the copyright owner in accordance with this Law are not prejudiced:

    1. (1)

      use of another person’s published work for purposes of the user’s own personal study, research or appreciation;

    2. (2)

      appropriate quotation from another person’s published work in one’s own work for the purpose of introducing or commenting on a certain work, or explaining a certain point;

    3. (3)

      unavoidable inclusion or quotation of a published work in the media, such as in a newspaper, periodical and radio and television program, for the purpose of reporting current events;

    4. (4)

      publishing or rebroadcasting by the media, such as a newspaper, periodical, radio station and television station, of an article published by another newspaper or periodical, or broadcast by another radio station or television station, etc. on current political, economic or religious topics, except where the author declares that such publishing or rebroadcasting is not permitted;

    5. (5)

      publishing or broadcasting by the media, such as a newspaper, periodical, radio station and television station of a speech delivered at a public gathering, except where the author declares that such publishing or broadcasting is not permitted;

    6. (6)

      translation, or reproduction in a small quantity of copies of a published work by teachers or scientific researchers for use in classroom teaching or scientific research, provided that the translation or the reproductions are not published for distribution;

    7. (7)

      use of a published work by a State organ to a justifiable extent for the purpose of fulfilling its official duties;

    8. (8)

      reproduction of a work in its collections by a library, archive, memorial hall, museum, art gallery, etc. for the purpose of display, or preservation of a copy, of the work;

    9. (9)

      gratuitous live performance of a published work, for which no fees are charged to the public, nor payments are made to the performers;

    10. (10)

      copying, drawing, photographing or video-recording of a work of art put up or displayed in an outdoor public place;

    11. (11)

      translation of a published work of a Chinese citizen, legal entity or other organization from Han language into minority nationality languages for publication and distribution in the country; and

    12. (12)

      transliteration of a published work into braille for publication.

      (Translation by WIPO).

  30. 30.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 22–23.

  31. 31.

    See, e.g., Walt Disney Productions v. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751, 755 (9th Cir. 1978) (noting that “it is difficult to delineate distinctively a literary character” but that “when the author can add a visual image, however, the difficulty is reduced”). See also Lawrence L. Davidow, Copyright Protection for Fictional Characters: A Trademark Based Approach to Replace Nichols, 8 Colum.-VLA Art & L. 513 (1983).

  32. 32.

    Walt Disney Productions v. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751, 753–58 (9th Cir. 1978); See also Dr. Seuss Enters. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394, 1400 (9th Cir. 1997).

  33. 33.

    See U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 92, Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code (Dec. 2011), http://www.copyright.gov/title17/circ92.pdf.

  34. 34.

    17 U.S.C. § 103(a) (2012).

  35. 35.

    Lessig, supra note 9 in Chap. 1, at 181–82.

  36. 36.

    See Sean Gordon Murphy, Grays, DeviantART Blog (Feb. 18, 2012, 10:57:22 PM), http://seangordonmurphy.deviantart.com/journal/Grays-285895348.

  37. 37.

    Mehra, supra note 26 in Chap. 1, at 171.

  38. 38.

    Stendell, supra note 72 in Chap. 2, at 1554.

  39. 39.

    See Anderson v. Stallone, 11 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1161; Copyright L. Rep. (CCH) P22, 665.

  40. 40.

    Stendell, supra note 72 in Chap. 2, at 1562–64.

  41. 41.

    1 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer On Copyright, § 2.12, at 2–175 (2002).

  42. 42.

    See. e.g., 1 Paul Goldstein, Goldstein on Copyright §2 2:92 (Wolters Kluwer Law & Business 3rd ed. 2013) (“Fully realized characters in literature are little different from fully defined personalities in daily life, and it is no surprise that the test of protectibility that courts apply to literary characters is closely akin to the criterion that individuals apply in daily life to determine whether they in truth know someone. A literary character can be said to have a distinctive personality, and thus to be protectable, when it has been delineated to the point at which its behavior is relatively predictable so that, when placed in a new plot situation, it will react in ways that are at once distinctive and unsurprising.”). See also Michael Todd Helfland, Note, When Mickey Mouse is as Strong as Superman: The Convergence of Intellectual Property Laws to Protect Fictional Literary and Pictorial Characters, 44 Stan. L. Rev. 623, 630–31 (1991).

  43. 43.

    Nichols v. Universal Pictures Corporation, 45 F.2d 119, 121, 7 U.S.P.Q. at 87 (2d Cir. 1930).

  44. 44.

    Columbia Broadcasting Systems., Inc. v. DeCosta, 377 F.2d 315, 321, 153 U.S.P.Q. 649, 654 (1st Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1007, 10 L.Ed.2d. 603, 88 S. Ct. 565 (1967).

  45. 45.

    Stendell, supra note 72 in Chap. 2, at 1572.

  46. 46.

    Hetcher, supra note 79 in Chap. 2, at 1912.

  47. 47.

    Tushnet, supra note 70 in Chap. 2, at 678; See also Kaelyn Christian, Fan Fiction and the Fair Use Doctrine, 65 The Serials Librarian 277, 284 (2013).

  48. 48.

    Suntrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F.3d 1257, 1276 (11th Cir. 2001).

  49. 49.

    Salinger v. Colting, 641 F. Supp. 2d 250 (S.D. N.Y. 2009).

  50. 50.

    K.K. Matsudera v. King Features Syndicate, Inc., Saikō Saibansho [Sup. Ct. of Japan] Jul. 17, 1997, 1992 (o) No. 1443, translated at http://www.softic.or.jp/en/cases/popeye.html (Japan).

  51. 51.

    Keiko Nagita v. Yumiko Igarashi, Saikō Saibansho [Sup. Ct. of Japan] Oct. 25, 2001, Case No. 798 (Ju) of 2000, translated at http://www.tomeika.jur.kyushu-u.ac.jp/ip/pdf/25%20October%202001.pdf (Japan).

  52. 52.

    Kenneth L. Port, Copyright Protection of Fictional Characters in Japan, 7 Wis. Int’l L.J. 205, 213 (1988).

  53. 53.

    See Peter Ganea, Protected Works, in Japanese Copyright Law: Writings in Honour of Gerhard Schricker 27 n. 39 (Peter Ganea et al. eds, 2005).

  54. 54.

    See Tokimeki Memorial Case, Saikō Saibansho [Sup. Ct., 3d Petit Bench] Feb. 13, 2001, 1999 (Receipt) No. 955, translated at http://www.softic.or.jp/en/cases/Tokimemo_Sup.html (Japan). In this case, the court claimed that the defendant’s memory card, which could help players of the copyrighted works to steal game credits and directly jump to the end, had infringed the author’s “right to preserve the identity of the Game Software.”

  55. 55.

    Ganea, supra note 53, at 28.

  56. 56.

    Japanese Copyright Law, art. 27.

  57. 57.

    Id. art. 20.

  58. 58.

    Id. art. 28.

  59. 59.

    Id. arts. 30–47.

  60. 60.

    Yasuhiro Arai & Shinya Kinukawa, Copyright Infringement as User Innovation, 38 Journal of Cultural Economics 131, 132 (2014).

  61. 61.

    The most common types of fanfics are in-canon writing, alternative universe stories, cross-overs, relationshipper (or shipper) narratives, and self-insert fanfic. See supra Sect. 2.2.1 Fanfics, Doujinshis, and Scanlations.

  62. 62.

    Supreme Court decision of 28 March 1980, 967 Hanrei Jiho 45, as cited in Keiji Sugiyama, The First Parody Case in Japan, 9 Eur. Intell. Prop. Rev. 285, 287 (1987).

  63. 63.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 38.

  64. 64.

    Id. art. 2, art. 3(6).

  65. 65.

    See Meiguo Woerte Disini Gongsi su Beijing Chubanshe Deng Qinfan Zhuzuo Quan Jiufen An (美国沃尔特·迪斯尼公司诉北京出版社等侵犯著作权纠纷案) [Walt Disney Co. v. Beijing Publ’n], Sup. People’s Ct. Gaz., 1996, at 136 (Beijing Higher People’s Ct. Dec. 19, 1995) (China) (explicitly stating that characters owned by Disney such as Mickey Mouse are all under copyright protection in China). See also Yuangu Zhizuo Zhushi Huishe Su Shanghai Yuyuan Guoji Shangcheng Gouwu Zhongxin Youxian Gongsi (圆谷株式会社诉上海豫园公司案) [Tsuburaya Productions. v. Shanghai Yuyuan Co.], Selected Cases of the People’s Court, 2003, at 333 (Shanghai Higher People’s Ct. Sep. 11, 2000) (上海市高级人民法院民事判决书沪高知终字第43号) (China) (clearly indicating that the anime characters of Ultraman are protected in accordance with the Berne Convention, and the CCL, as the series could be deemed a “painting.”).

  66. 66.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 10(6).

  67. 67.

    Id. art. 10 (14).

  68. 68.

    Id. art. 10 (15).

  69. 69.

    Id. art. 12.

  70. 70.

    Id. art. 47.

  71. 71.

    Id. art. 12.

  72. 72.

    Id. art. 22.

  73. 73.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shenli Zhuzuoquan Minshi Jiufen Anjian Shiyong Falv Ruogan Wenti De Jieshi (最高人民法院关于审理著作权民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释) [Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court Concerning Several Issues on Application of Law in Hearing Correctly the Civil Copyright] (promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court Oct. 15, 2002) (China), translated at World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO Lex No. CN038, http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=181509.

  74. 74.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 10 (14) (“the right of adaptation, that is, the right to change a work into a new one with originality.”).

  75. 75.

    See e.g., Jiamei Li (李佳梅) & Mei Du (杜梅), Shizhixing Xiangsi Jia Jiechu Shi Panding Zuopin Qinquan de Hexin Biaozhun (实质性相似加接触”是判定作品侵权的核心标准) [“Substantial Similarity plus Access” is the core Standard in Copyright Infringement Judgement], in Zhongguo Fayuan Wang (中国法院网) [Chinacourt.org], Feb. 11, 2015, at http://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2015/02/id/1554526.shtml. See also Zhuang Yu Yu Guo Jingming Chunfeng Wenyi Chubanshe Zhuzuoquan Qinquan Jiufen An (庄羽与郭敬明、春风文艺出版社著作权侵权纠纷案) [Zhuang Yu v. Guo Jingming & Chunfeng Press], (Higher People’s Ct. of Beijing, GMZZ.No.384, May. 22, 2006) (北京市高级人民法院(2005)高民终字第539号), at http://bjgy.chinacourt.org/paper/detail/2006/06/id/11071.shtml.

  76. 76.

    Qian Wang (王迁), Zhishi Chanquan Fa Jiaocheng (知识产权法教程) [Tutorials on Intellectual Property Law] 246–47 (3rd ed. 2011).

  77. 77.

    Liang Li (李亮), Lun Xuxie Zuopin de Zhuzuoquan Baohu (论续写作品的著作权保护) [On the Protection of the Copyright of Continuation Works], Hebei Faxue (河北法学) [Hebei Law Science], no. 2, 2005, at 73.

  78. 78.

    Zhanlong Sun (孙战龙), Wangluo Tongren Xiaoshuo de Quanli Jieding (网络同人小说的权利界定) [The Demarcation Between the Rights of Internet Fanfiction Authors and Other Rights], Wangluo Falü Pinglun (网络法律评论) [Internet Law Review] 170 (2006).

  79. 79.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 10 (5).

  80. 80.

    Id. art. 10 (12).

  81. 81.

    Id. arts. 35, 37, 40.

  82. 82.

    Trombley, supra note 80 in Chap. 2, at 649.

  83. 83.

    Patrick McKay, Culture of the Future: Adapting Copyright Law to Accommodate Fan-Made Derivative Works in the Twenty-First Century, 24 Regent U. L. Rev. 117, 132–33 (2011).

  84. 84.

    Kirkpatrick, supra note 27 in Chap. 1, at 136.

  85. 85.

    Trombley, supra note 80 in Chap. 2, at 660.

  86. 86.

    Id. at 676, 684 (“…the ability of the fanvidder to successfully assert a fair use defense with respect to the video source is irrelevant, except in determining which plaintiffs can actually assert their rights against her; she only needs to be found to infringe on one copyrighted work to be effectively shut down.”). See also Kirkpatrick, supra note 27 in Chap. 1, at 142 (“AMVs use… the song in its entirety. Depending on which owner is claiming infringement, a different finding may result under this factor.”).

  87. 87.

    Grand Upright Music v. Warner Bros. Records, 780 F. Supp. 182, 183 (S.D.N.Y. 1991).

  88. 88.

    Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005).

  89. 89.

    This is evident from an online interview with the copyright specialists at Funimation. See Dong & Pocock, supra note 9 in Chap. 2 (“The main reasons for this are that they can often serve a promotional purpose, and legally, they can sometimes constitute Fair Use. The basic thinking going into fan videos is thus: if it whets the audience’s appetite, we’ll leave it alone. But if it sates the audience’s appetite, it needs to come down.”); see also Tim Armstrong, What Gets Created Under a “Tolerated Use” Regime? Info/Law Blog, Oct. 18, 2007, at https://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/10/18/what-gets-created-under-a-tolerated-use-regime/ (“…they’ve just found a way to crowdsource their own marketing budgets.”).

  90. 90.

    Trombley, supra note 80 in Chap. 2, at 667.

  91. 91.

    Rogoyski & Basin, supra note 6 in Chap. 1, at 245 (“Overall, the balance of factors under the fair use analysis clearly indicates that Hu Ge’s work would be protected under American copyright law.”).

  92. 92.

    Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer v. American Honda Motor Co., 900 F. Supp. 1287, 1298 (C.D. Cal. 1995) (holding that there was substantial similarity between a commercial video advertisement and the James Bond movies, with regard to “theme, plot, and sequence,” “characters,” and “mood and pace,” as the advertisement had borrowed some elements from the movie series).

  93. 93.

    Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569, 580–81 (1994) (“[p]arody needs to mimic an original to make its point, and so has some claim to use the creation of its victim’s… imagination, whereas satire can stand on its own two feet and so requires justification for the very act of borrowing.”).

  94. 94.

    According to Posner, a genuine parody “uses the parodied work as a target rather than as a weapon” and “take[s] so large a fraction (somehow computed) of the copyrighted features of the original work as to make the parody a substitute for that work.” Richard A. Posner, When is Parody Fair Use? 21 J. Legal Stud. 67, 71 (1992).

  95. 95.

    Laura R. Bradford, Parody and Perception: Using Cognitive Research to Expand Fair Use in Copyright, 46 B.C. L. Rev. 705, 720 (2004).

  96. 96.

    Trombley, supra note 80 in Chap. 2, at 675.

  97. 97.

    Miya Sudo & Simon Newman, Japanese Copyright Law Reform: Introduction of the Mysterious Anglo-American Fair Use Doctrine or an EU Style Divine Intervention via Competition Law?, 18 Intell. Prop. Q. 40, 41 (2014); Mariko A. Foster, Parody’s Precarious Place: The Need to Legally Recognize Parody as Japan’s Cultural Property, 23 Seton Hall J. Sports & Ent. L. 313, 316 (2013).

  98. 98.

    Id.

  99. 99.

    Japanese Copyright Law, art. 32.

  100. 100.

    See supra note 62 and accompanying text.

  101. 101.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 10 (12), (14).

  102. 102.

    Id. art. 22.

  103. 103.

    Trombley, supra note 80 in Chap. 2, at 675.

  104. 104.

    Rogoyski & Basin, supra note 6 in Chap. 1, at 243 (“Like most parodies, The Steamed Bun relies heavily on the underlying work to convey its message. Though the Steamed Bun case ultimately never went to court, under the likely narrow reading of Article 22(2), The Steamed Bun appears to be a copyright violation.”).

  105. 105.

    See e.g., Rogoyski & Basin, supra note 6 in Chap. 1, at 241; Suli (苏力), Xifang de Falu Baohu yu Xianzhi Cong Yige Mantou Yinfa de Xuean Qieru (戏仿的法律保护和限制—从 《一个馒头引发的血案》 切入) [Legal Protection of Parodies and its Limits], Zhongguo Faxue (中国法学) [China Legal Science], no. 3, 2006, 11; Weidong Ji (季卫东), Wangluohua Shehui de Xifang yu Gongping Jingzheng Guanyu Zhuzuoquan Zhidu Sheji de Bijiao Fenxi (网络化社会的戏仿与公平竞争—关于著作权制度设计的比较分析) [Parody and Fair Competition in the Network Society], Zhongguo Faxue (中国法学) [China Legal Science], no. 3, 2006, 21.

  106. 106.

    For more discussions on parody in China, see infra Sect. 5.2.3.2 Protection for Parody.

  107. 107.

    Jenny Lynn Sheridan, Copyright’s Knowledge Principle, 17 Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 39, 45 (2014).

  108. 108.

    Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. 151 (1975).

  109. 109.

    Id. at 156.

  110. 110.

    H. R. Rep. No. 2222, 60th Cong., 2d, Sess. 7 (1909).

  111. 111.

    Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. 151, at 156 (1975).

  112. 112.

    Neil Weinstock Netanel, Locating Copyright within the First Amendment Skein, 54 Stan. L. Rev. 1, 5 (2001).

  113. 113.

    U.S. Const. Amend. I.

  114. 114.

    Suntrust v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F. 3d 1257, 1263 (11th Cir. 2001). For a more detailed discussion about this, see Paul Goldstein, Copyright and the First Amendment, 70 Colum. L. Rev. 983 (1970).

  115. 115.

    Suntrust v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F. 3d 1257, 1277 (11th Cir. 2001).

  116. 116.

    Netanel, supra note 112, at 2.

  117. 117.

    For example, both the “copyright clause” and the “free speech clause” claims were rejected in the Eldred v. Ashcroft case. See Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003). In Eldred v. Reno, the court’s assertion that “copyrights are categorically immune from challenges under the First Amendment” was widely accepted. See Eldred v. Reno, 239 F.3d 375 (D.C. Cir. 2001); The court believed that the “idea/expression dichotomy of copyright law, under which ideas are free but their particular expression can be copyrighted, has always been held to give adequate protection to free expression”. See Id. at 376; it is also noted that, as long as copyright protected no idea but only expression, “there was no possibility to raise a first amendment challenge.” See Lessig, supra note 106 in Chap. 2, at 1071.

  118. 118.

    Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569, 579 (1994).

  119. 119.

    Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Inc. v. Comline Bus. Data, Inc., 166 F.3d 65, 74 (2d Cir.1999).

  120. 120.

    Suntrust v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F. 3d 1257, 1269 (11th Cir. 2001).

  121. 121.

    Nihon Koku Kenpo, (日本国憲法) [The Constitution of Japan], Promulgated on Nov. 3, 1946, Came into effect on May 3, 1947, art. 12. Translation available at http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/zh/text.jsp?file_id=191550.

  122. 122.

    Id. art. 13.

  123. 123.

    Id. art. 29.

  124. 124.

    Japanese Copyright Law, art. 1.

  125. 125.

    Peter Ganea, et al., Japanese Copyright Law: Writings in Honour of Gerhard Schricker 11 (Peter Ganea, et al. eds., Kluwer Law International. 2005).

  126. 126.

    Nagoya Chiho Saibansho [Nagoya Dist. Ct.] Feb. 7, 2003, H14 (wa) No. 2148, 1840 Hanrei Jiho [Hanji] 126; affd, Nagoya Koto Saibansho [Nagoya High Ct.] Mar. 4, 2004; 1870 Hanrei Jiho [Hanji] 123; petition for jokoku appeal refused, Saiko Saibansho [Sup. Ct. of Japan], 3d Petty Bench, Sept. 28, 2004, as cited in Teruo Doi, Availability of the “Fair Use” Defense under the Copyright Act of Japan: Legislative and Case Law Developments for Better Adapting It to the Digital/Network Environment, 57 J. Copyright Soc’y U.S.A. 636 (2010).

  127. 127.

    Id.

  128. 128.

    Xianfa (宪法) [Constitution of the People's Republic of China] (1982), Adopted at the Fifth Session of the Fifth National People’s Congress on December 4, 1982 and adopted at the First Session of the Eighth National People’s Congress on March 29, 1993, Amended in accordance with the Amendments to the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China adopted respectively at the First Session of the Seventh National People’s Congress on April 12, 1988, the First Session of the Eighth National People’s Congress on March 29, 1993, the Second Session of the Ninth National People’s Congress on March 15, 1999 and the Second Session of the Tenth National People’s Congress on March 14, 2004. (hereinafter the Constitution of China), translated at http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Constitution/node_2825.htm.

  129. 129.

    Id. art. 47.

  130. 130.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 1.

  131. 131.

    Creemers, supra note 128 in Chap. 3, at 570.

  132. 132.

    Dong & Gu, supra note 131 in Chap. 3, at 344.

  133. 133.

    Lanping Wang (王兰萍), Xianxing Zhuzuoquan Fa Zongze de Zai Dingwei yu Wanshan (现行著作权法总则的再定位与完善) [The Reorientation and Perfection of the General Provisions of Current Copyright Law], Zhongguo Zhishi Chanquan (中国知识产权) [China Intellectual Property], no. 11, 2010, at 37–41.

  134. 134.

    Xiaoqing Feng (冯晓青), Zhuzuoquan Fa Mudi yu Liyi Pingheng Lun (著作权法目的与利益平衡论) [On the Purpose and the Balance of Interests of Copyright Law], Keji yu Falv (科技与法律) [Science Technology and Law], no. 2, 2004, at 85.

  135. 135.

    William M. Landes & Richard A. Posner, Indefinitely Renewable Copyright, 70 U. Chi. L. Rev. 471, 472 (2003).

  136. 136.

    See supra Sect. 3.1.1.5 Open Up Period (1991-present).

  137. 137.

    SPC Opinions on Socialist Culture, art. 8.

  138. 138.

    Chen Li (李琛), Lun Wo Guo Zhuzuoquan Fa Xiuding zhong Heli Shiyong de Lifa Jishu (论我国著作权法修订中“合理使用”的立法技术) [On the Legislative Technique of “Fair Use” in the Revision of our Copyright Law], Zhishi Chanquan (知识产权) [Intellectual Property], no. 1, 2013, at 16.

  139. 139.

    Kim Lewison, The Interpretation of Contracts 152 (Sweet & Maxwell 3rd ed. 2004).

  140. 140.

    John S. Sieman, Using the Implied License to Inject Common Sense into Digital Copyright, 85 N.C.L. Rev. 885, 890 (2006).

  141. 141.

    Orit Fischman Afori, Implied License: An Emerging New Standard in Copyright Law, 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 275, 276 (2008).

  142. 142.

    Adams v. Burke, 84 U.S. (17 Wall.) at 456, as cited by id. at 280, n.11.

  143. 143.

    Rachel Clark Hughey, Implied Licenses by Legal Estoppel, 14 Alb. LJ Sci. & Tech. 53, 56 (2003), as cited by Afori, supra note 141, at 280, n.13.

  144. 144.

    2 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer On Copyright, § 10. 10[B] (2008), as cited by Afori, supra note 141, at 286, n.45.

  145. 145.

    Effects Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen, 908 F.2d 555 (9th Cir. 1990).

  146. 146.

    3 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer On Copyright, § 10.03[A], at 10–36 (1989), as cited by Afori, supra note 141, at 286, n.45.

  147. 147.

    A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001).

  148. 148.

    SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, L.P. v. Watson Pharms., Inc., 211 F.3d 21, 25 (2d Cir. 2000) (quoting Effects Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen, 908 F.2d 555, 558 (9th Cir. 1990)), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 173 (2000).

  149. 149.

    I.A.E., Inc. v. Shaver, 74 F.3d 768, 776 (7th Cir. 1996).

  150. 150.

    Roberto Hevia, Estate of v. Portrio Corp., 602 F.3d 34, 94 U.S.P.Q.2d 1501(1st Cir. 2010); see also SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, L.P. v. Watson Pharms, Inc., 211F.3d 21, 54 U.S.P.Q.2d 1317 (2d Cir. 2000).

  151. 151.

    Goldstein, supra note 42, at §1 5:32.2–5:32.3.

  152. 152.

    Field v. Google, Inc., 412 F.Supp.2d 1106 (D. Nev. 2006).

  153. 153.

    Id. at 1115–1116.

  154. 154.

    Id. at 1116.

  155. 155.

    In here, of course, whether an industry practice exists or not plays an important role in determining the “actual knowledge of the use”.

  156. 156.

    See also Keane Dealer Servs. v. Harts, 968 F. Supp. 944, 947 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (knowledge of use, coupled with “silence in the face of [the defendant’s] use,” constituted an implied license).

  157. 157.

    Google had launched its Google Books project along with several major research libraries since 2004, to digitally copy books in their collections. As a consequence, Google has scanned more than twenty million books. Many of these books are copyrighted and scanned without permission from the copyright holders, thus many copyright holders chose to sue Google for copyright infringement in 2005. See Authors Guild v. Google, Case 1:05-cv-08136-DC Document 1088 Filed 11/14/13, at 1, at http://www.publishersweekly.com/binary-data/ARTICLE_ATTACHMENT/file/000/001/1887-2.pdf. See also Jonathan Band, Features–The Authors Guild v. The Google Print Library Project, LLRX.com, Oct. 15, 2005, at http://www.llrx.com/features/googleprint.htm; see also Andrew Albanese, Google Wins: Court Issues a Ringing Endorsement of Google Books, Publisher Weekly, Nov. 14, 2013, at http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/content-and-e-books/article/60006-google-wins-court-issues-a-ringing-endorsement-of-google-books.html.

  158. 158.

    The Authors Guild, the publishing industry and Google entered into a settlement agreement on 2008, they amended it in 2009 and it was rejected by Circuit Judge Denny Chin on 2011. See Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 77o F. Supp. 2d 666 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) ( The court held that it would be “incongruous with the purpose of the copyright laws to place the onus on copyright owners to come forward to protect their rights when Google copied their works without first seeking their permission.” Id. at 682). And interestingly, this case was dismissed in favor of Google by the same Judge on 2013. See Authors Guild v. Google, Case 1:05-cv-08136-DC Document 1088 Filed 11/14/13.

  159. 159.

    Andrew Albanese, Google Wins: Court Issues a Ringing Endorsement of Google Books, Publishers Weekly, Nov 14, 2013. 2013.

  160. 160.

    Michael Mattioli, Opting Out: Procedural Fair Use, 12 Va. J.L. & Tech. 1, 2–10 (2007).

  161. 161.

    Band, Features–The Authors Guild v. The Google Print Library Project. 2005.

  162. 162.

    Stewart v. Abend, 495 U.S. 207, 237 (1990), as cited by Id.

  163. 163.

    Band, Features–The Authors Guild v. The Google Print Library Project. 2005.

  164. 164.

    In the Authors Guild v. Google case the answer is currently yes.

  165. 165.

    Landgericht Hamburg, Urteil vom 5.9.2003, Aktenzeichen: 308 O 449/03.

  166. 166.

    Google Bildersuche - Thumbnails rechtlich zulässig, LG Erfurt, Urteil vom 15.3.2007, Az 3 O 1108/05.

  167. 167.

    See e.g., “Google Image Search” German Federal Supreme Court, Apr. 29, 2010. Case IZR 69/08, [2010] GRUR 628, as cited by Paul Goldstein & P. B. Hugenholtz, International Copyright: Principles, Law, and Practice 405, n.194 (Oxford University Press 3rd ed. 2013).

  168. 168.

    It is noted that “the traditional implied license doctrine does not apply where there is no agreement between the parties, or worse, when the copyright holder explicitly refuses to permit the reproduction or other dissemination of his or her work.” See Afori, supra note 141, at 277.

  169. 169.

    Minpō (民法) [Civil Code of Japan], Act No. 89 of April 27, 1896, amended by Act No. 78 of 2006, translated at Japanese Law Translation Database System, (Ministry of Justice of Japan trans., 2009) http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?ft=2&re=02&dn=1&yo=%E6%B0%91%E6%B3%95&x=0&y=0&ia=03&ky=&page=3 (hereinafter Civil Code of Japan).

  170. 170.

    Tokyo High Court, 4 August 1998. 1667 Hanrei Jiho 131: the consent to the publication of a Haiku poem is found when it is contributed to the Haiku magazine; Tokyo High Court, 19 December 1991. Hosei Daigaku Kensho Ronbun: the implied consent is found when the author did not show objection to the offer of the publication, as cited by Ganea, et al., supra note 125, at 78, n.4.

  171. 171.

    The General Principles of the Civil Law of China.

  172. 172.

    Hetong Fa (合同法) [the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China] (Adopted by the National People’s Congress on March 15, 1999, and promulgated by the Presidential Order No. 15), translated at World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO Lex No. CN137, http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=182632 (herein after “the Contract Law of China”).

  173. 173.

    See e.g., the General Principles of the Civil Law of China, art. 56 (state that “a civil juristic act may be in written, oral or other form”); See also the Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 10 (state that “a contract may be made in a writing, in an oral conversation, as well as in any other form”).

  174. 174.

    Xinxi Wangluo Chuanbo Quan Baohu Tiaoli (信息网络传播权保护条例) [Regulation on the Protection of the Right to Network Dissemination of Information], (adopted at the 135th Executive Meeting of the State Council on May 10, 2006, effective as of July 1, 2006) (herein after “the Network Information Regulation”) (China), translated at World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO Lex No. CN064, http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=182147.

  175. 175.

    See Heilongjiang Jin Nong Xinxi Jishu Youxian Gongsi Yu Beijing San Mian Xiang Banquan Daili Youxian Gongsi Ji Haerbin Lang Xin Keji Fazhan Youxian Gongsi Qinfan Zhuzuoquan Jiufen Yi An (黑龙江金农信息技术有限公司与北京三面向版权代理有限公司及哈尔滨朗新科技发展有限公司侵犯著作权纠纷一案) [Heilongjiang Jinnong Information Technology Co. Ltd. v. Beijing 3rd Mianxiang Banquan Agency Limited Company and Haerbin Langxin Technology Development Co. Ltd.], (Higher People's Ct. of Heilongjiang Province, Heizhizhongzi no. 4 decision, Dec. 10, 2008) (黑龙江省高级人民法院[2008]黑知终字第4号民事判决书).

  176. 176.

    3 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer On Copyright, § 12.06, at 12–124.14 (2002).

  177. 177.

    Famous Music Corp. v. Bay State Harness Horse Racing & Breeding Ass’n. Inc., 423 F. Supp. 341 (D. Mass. 1976). aff’d, 554 F.2d 1213 (1st Cir. 1977).

  178. 178.

    Harmony Gold U.S.A. Inc. v. FASA. Corp., 40 U.S.P.Q.2d 1057. 1060 (N.D. III. 1996).

  179. 179.

    Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance Machinery Co., 324 US 806, 814 (1945). Furthermore, some scholars even claimed that courts will not only consider “the length, nature and causes of the delay, the excuses for it, the nature and extent of any prejudice to the defendant caused by the delay, and the defendant’s good faith in relation to the delay”, they will also consider “any other circumstances relevant to the fairness or equity of relief in the particular case.” See 1 Jay Dratler, Licensing of Intellectual Property § 3.05[1], at 3–69 (Law Journal Seminars-Press. 2001).

  180. 180.

    Id. at 3–71.

  181. 181.

    Id.

  182. 182.

    Id. at 3–70.

  183. 183.

    Vikas K. Didwania, The Defense of Laches in Copyright Infringement Claims, 75 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1227, 1230–1232 (2008).

  184. 184.

    Lyons Partnership, LP v Morris Costumes, Inc., 243 F3d 789 (4th Cir 2001).

  185. 185.

    Id at 799, quoting Fitzgerald Publishing Co. v. Baylor Publishing Co., 807 F2d 1110, 1115 (2d Cir 1986).

  186. 186.

    Hampton v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 279 F.2d 100 (9th Cir. 1960).

  187. 187.

    4 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer On Copyright, § 13.07, at 13–276 (2002).

  188. 188.

    Field v. Google, Inc., 412 F.Supp.2d 1106, at 1116–1117 (D. Nev. 2006).

  189. 189.

    Lee, supra note 16 in Chap. 1, at 1495.

  190. 190.

    Quinn v. City of Detroit, 23 F. Supp.2d 741. 753 (E.D. Mich. 1998).

  191. 191.

    “The mere affixation of the copyright notice on copies of the work, if seen by the defendant, has been held to constitute a sufficient assertion of the plaintiffs right so as to counter an estoppel based upon a passive holding out”. See 4 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer On Copyright, § 13.07, at 13–276 (2002).

  192. 192.

    Id.

  193. 193.

    Report Q175 in the name of the Japanese Group, The Role of Equivalents and Prosecution History in Defining the Scope of Patent Protection, AIPPI, at 2, at https://www.aippi.org/download/commitees/175/GR175japan.pdf.

  194. 194.

    Civil Code of Japan, art. 1(2).

  195. 195.

    Minji Soshoho (民事訴訟法) [Code of Civil Procedure of Japan], Act No. 109 of 1996, amended by Act No. 36 of 2011, translated at Japanese Law Translation Database System, (Ministry of Justice of Japan trans., 2009) http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?ft=2&re=02&dn=1&yo=&ia=03&x=16&y=15&kn[]=%E3%81%BF&ky=&page=9.

  196. 196.

    The Kewpie case, Tokyo District Court, Nov. 17, 1999. Hanrei Jihô No. 1797: 111, 131.

  197. 197.

    The General Principles of the Civil Law of China, art. 4 (here “honesty and credibility” is equivalent to “good faith”.).

  198. 198.

    Xie Li (李勰), Chengshi Xinyong Yuanze de Sifa Shiyong – Yi Alexy de Yuanze Lilun Wei Shijiao (诚实信用原则的司法适用—以Alexy的原则理论为视角) [Judicial Application of the Principle of Good Faith–From the Perspective of the Principle Theory by Alexy], Renda Falv Pinglun (人大法律评论) [ Renmin University Law Review] 131 (2013), available at http://www.civillaw.com.cn/article/default.asp?id=58622.

  199. 199.

    See Yuwen Li, Professional Ethics of Chinese Judges, Perspectives Chinoises 38 (2003); see also Priest, supra note 5 in Chap. 1, at 826–828.

  200. 200.

    Li, supra note 198.

  201. 201.

    See Lee, supra note 16 in Chap. 1, at 1536 (explained the folly of suing one’s own fans).

  202. 202.

    Donald P. Harris, The Honeymoon is Over: Evaluating the United States’ WTO Intellectual Property Complaint Against China, 32 Fordham Int’l L.J. 96, 167 (2009); see also Rogoyski & Basin, supra note 6 in Chap. 1, at 252–54; Peter K. Yu, Complex Guoqing and Intellectual Property Reforms in China, Peteryu.com, at http://www.peteryu.com/guoqing.pdf (“…one cannot help but question the effectiveness of the harmonization approach taken by developed countries… that approach often results in the creation of one-size-fits-all templates that ignore local needs and conditions. As a result, most of the existing reforms not only fail to target the crux of the piracy and counterfeiting problems, but have led to apathy and reluctance on the part of the local authorities and resistance and resentment among the local populace.”).

  203. 203.

    Panel Report, China—Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, WT/DS362/R (Jan. 26, 2009); Panel Report, China—Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products, WT/DS363/R (Aug. 12, 2009).

  204. 204.

    See e.g., Alan Story, Burn Berne: why the Leading International Copyright Convention must be Repealed, 40 Hous. L. Rev. 763 (2003); Anselm Kamperman Sanders, Intellectual Property Law and Policy and Economic Development with Special Reference to China, in Economic Analysis of Law in China (T. Eger, et al. eds., 2007).

  205. 205.

    Elanor A. Mangin, Market Access in China—Publications and Audiovisual Materials: A Moral Victory with a Silver Lining, 25 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 279, 308 (2010).

  206. 206.

    Arguably some developing nations are moving “intellectual property lawmaking from one international forum to another”. See Laurence R. Helfer, Regime Shifting: the TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking, 29 Yale J. Int’l L. 1, 53 (2004).

  207. 207.

    See generally Priest, supra note 5 in Chap. 1; Mertha, supra note 280 in Chap. 3, at 187.

  208. 208.

    Id. at 214.

  209. 209.

    Hamilton, supra note 10 in Chap. 1, at 613 (“Professor Hamilton argues that the TRIPS Agreement is already outdated because It neglects to address that a great portion of the international intellectual property market will soon be on-line. She suggests that this critical omission could be used unfairly by publishers to restrict the free-flow of ideas as a means of profiting from their copyrights.”).

  210. 210.

    See Daniels, supra note 25 in Chap. 1, at 735; see also Noda, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 99.

  211. 211.

    Fisher, supra note 13 in Chap. 1, at 199–259.

  212. 212.

    Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 256 (suggesting an exemption period for appropriating copyright owners’ works right before they themselves begin exploitation in a foreign market); Noda, supra note 25 in Chap. 1, at 140–48 (suggesting that it is reasonable to have an interpretive right containing all the permissible fan-base activities).

  213. 213.

    See e.g., Noda, supra note 28 in Chap. 1; Muscar, supra note 25 in Chap. 1.

  214. 214.

    See Wendy J. Gordon, Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the “Betamax” Case and its Predecessors, 82 Colum. L. Rev. 1600, 1627 (1982); William W. Fisher, Reconstructing the Fair Use Doctrine, 101 Harv. L. Rev. 1659, 1668 (1988); Samuelson, supra note 357 in Chap. 3, at 1232; Sheridan, supra note 107, at 99.

  215. 215.

    Copyright Modernization Act, S.C. 2011, c. 22, § 29.21(1) (a–d) (Canada).

  216. 216.

    Id (it requires that the UGC content “does not have a substantial adverse effect, financial or otherwise, on the exploitation or potential exploitation of the existing work or other subject matter.”).

  217. 217.

    See generally, Edward Lee, Copyright-Exempt Nonprofits: A Simple Proposal to Spur Innovation, 45 Ariz. St. L.J. 1433 (2013).

  218. 218.

    Id. at 1466.

  219. 219.

    Id. at 1455.

  220. 220.

    Afori, supra note 141, at 276.

  221. 221.

    Thuiskopieheffing is a Dutch tax levied on all devices capable of copying or downloading music or videos, such as smartphones.

  222. 222.

    Fisher, supra note 13 in Chap. 1, at 199–258; For a similar proposal, see Neil Weinstock Netanel, Impose a Non-commercial Use Levy to Allow Free Peer-to-Peer File Sharing, 17 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 1 (2003); For a proposal for China based on Fisher’s design, please see Priest, supra note 5 in Chap. 1, at 846–67.

  223. 223.

    See e.g., Martin Kretschmer, The Failure of Property Rules in Collective Administration: Rethinking Copyright Societies as Regulatory Instruments, 24 Eur. Intell. Prop. Rev. 126 (2002). See also Michael Geist, Music Licensing Would Be Viable for All, Toronto Star, Mar. 8, 2004, at http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2004/03/music-licensing-would-be-viable-for-all/.

  224. 224.

    See Martin LaMonica, Debating Digital Media’s Future, CNET, Sep. 18, 2003, at http://news.com.com/2100-1025-5079007.html.

  225. 225.

    Lessig, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 301.

  226. 226.

    Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, Official Journal L 167, 22/06/2001, P. 0010–0019 (hereinafter the InfoSoc Directive).

  227. 227.

    InfoSoc Directive, art. 5(2)(b) (“Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations to the reproduction right provided for in Article 2 in the following cases: (…) (b) in respect of reproductions on any medium made by a natural person for private use and for ends that are neither directly nor indirectly commercial, on condition that the right holders receive fair compensation which takes account of the application or non-application of technological measures referred to in Article 6 to the work or subject-matter concerned;”).

  228. 228.

    Padawan v. SGAE, C-467/08 of 21 October 2010, [2010] ECR I-10055.

  229. 229.

    Id.

  230. 230.

    Lucie Guibault, Private Copying Levy: The Aftershocks of Padawan, Kluwer Copyright Blog, Sep. 17, 2013, at http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2013/09/17/private-copying-levy-the-aftershocks-of-padawan/. Annette Kur & Thomas Dreier, European Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases & Materials 306–07 (Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 2013).

  231. 231.

    António Vitorino, Recommendations Resulting from the Mediation on Private Copying and Reprography Levies, Brussels, Jan. 31, 2013, at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/docs/levy_reform/130131_levies-vitorino-recommendations_en.pdf.

  232. 232.

    Case C-435/12, ACI Adam BV and Others v Stichting de Thuiskopie and Stichting Onderhandelingen Thuiskopie vergoeding, Apr. 10, 2014, at http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=150786&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=384493.

  233. 233.

    João Pedro Quintais & Alexander de Leeuw, Downloading from Unlawful Sources. Reflections following the Villalón Opinion on AciAdam and Others, Kluwer Copyright Blog, Feb. 27, 2014, at http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2014/02/27/downloading-from-unlawful-sources-reflections-following-the-villalon-opinion-on-aciadam-and-others/.

  234. 234.

    See generally, Yu, supra note 202.

  235. 235.

    Stef van Gompel, Copyright Formalities in the Internet Age: Filters of Protection or Facilitators of Licensing, 28 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1425, 1456 (2013); Niva Elkin-Koren, Can Formalities Save the Public Domain? Reconsidering Formalities for the 2010s, 28 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1537, 1541 (2013).

  236. 236.

    Christopher Sprigman, Reform(aliz)ing Copyright, 57 Stan. L. Rev. 485, 488 (2004).

  237. 237.

    Samuelson, supra note 357 in Chap. 3, at 1198.

  238. 238.

    Berne Convention, art. 5(2). For similar requirement, see also UCC, art. III; WIPO Copyright Treaty, Dec. 20, 1996, S. Treaty Doc. No. 105–17 (1997), 36 I.L.M. 65 (1997), art. 1(4) [hereinafter WIPO Copyright Treaty]. TRIPS Agreement art. 9(1).

  239. 239.

    It is feasible if the formality requirement only applies to domestic works, as the rights guaranteed under Article 5(2) of the Berne Convention only apply “outside the country of origin” scenario. See Berne Convention, art. 5. For existing example, see 17 U.S.C § 411(2012) (“…no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until pre-registration or registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.”); See also Sprigman, supra note 236, at 551 (“Because Berne does not prevent signatories from imposing formalities on the works of domestic authors or authors from non-Berne signatory nations…”). WIPO, Guide to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Paris Act, 1971) 33 (1978) (“country remains absolutely free to subordinate the existence or exercise of the rights on that work in that country to such conditions or formalities as it thinks fit: it is purely a matter of domestic law”). However, restricting domestic authors may raise political and practical problems as well, see Jane C. Ginsburg, With Untired Spirits and Formal Constancy: Berne Compatibility of Formal Declaratory Measures to Enhance Copyright Title-Searching, 28 Berkeley Tech. LJ 1583, 1587 (2013).

  240. 240.

    Thomas F. Cotter, Prolegomenon to a Memetic Theory of Copyright: Comments on Lawrence Lessig’s The Creative Commons, 55 Fla. L. Rev. 779, 779–80, n.2 (2003) (“…reintroducing mandatory formalities into U.S. law might require the United States to withdraw from international copyright treaties…”); see also Sprigman, supra note 236, at 552.

  241. 241.

    Id. at 545–54.

  242. 242.

    WIPO, supra note 239, at 33. This is a prevailing explanation, see also Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1589 (“…the term “formality” encompasses both formal and material conditions on the existence or enforcement of rights”).

  243. 243.

    Berne Convention, art. 5(1) (“… the rights which their respective laws do now or may hereafter grant to their nationals, as well as the rights specially granted by this Convention.”).

  244. 244.

    Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1590. See also Stef van Gompel, Formalities in Copyright Law: An Analysis of Their History, Rationales and Possible Future 199 (Kluwer Law International. 2011).

  245. 245.

    Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1590.

  246. 246.

    Id.

  247. 247.

    Id. See also van Gompel, supra note 244, at 200.

  248. 248.

    See e.g., Samuelson, supra note 357 in Chap. 3, at 1198–202; Sprigman, supra note 236, at 554–67; Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1613–21.

  249. 249.

    Samuelson, supra note 357 in Chap. 3, at 1200.

  250. 250.

    Sprigman, supra note 236, at 555.

  251. 251.

    See e.g., Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1593.

  252. 252.

    Berne Convention, art. 7.

  253. 253.

    2010 Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, art. 21; Japanese Copyright Law, art. 51. Japan may endorse 70 years plus author’s lifetime in the future, under the pressure of TPP negotiations. See Ida Torres, Japan Considering Extending Copyright Terms to 70 Years after Author’s Death, Japan Daily Press, at http://japandailypress.com/japan-considering-extending-copyright-terms-to-70-years-after-authors-death-1032092/.

  254. 254.

    17 U.S.C § 302(a) (2012).

  255. 255.

    See e.g., Lessig, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 135 (“American law no longer had an automatic way to assure that works that were no longer exploited passed into the public domain. And indeed, after these changes, it is unclear whether it is even possible to put works into the public domain. The public domain is orphaned by these changes in copyright law. Despite the requirement that terms be “limited,” we have no evidence that anything will limit them.”); James Boyle, The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind 131 (Yale University Press. 2008) (“Most of the culture of the twentieth century, produced under a perfectly well-functioning system with much shorter copyright terms, is still locked up and will be for many years to come.”); Bell, supra note 107 in Chap. 2, at 786 (Federal lawmakers favor expanding the rights of copyright owners over…the public interest.); Jessica Litman, Digital Copyright 77–8 (Prometheus Books Pbk. ed. 2006) (claiming that the past copyright reforms are done “in ways that have expanded copyright’s scope and blinded many of us to the dangers that arise from protecting too much, too expansively for too long.”); Yufeng Li (李雨峰), Lun Zhuzuo Caichanquan de Baohuqi (论著作财产权的保护期) [On the Protection Term of Copyright], Zhengzhi Yu Falu (政治与法律) [Political Science and Law], no. 4, 2008, at 121–2 (“the consequences of a copyright extension are: (1)violation of the rule of law…(2) eroding the public domain…(3)re-construction of social structure”).

  256. 256.

    See e.g., Lessig, supra note 9 in Chap. 1, at 251–2; Landes & Posner, supra note 135, at 473.

  257. 257.

    Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1589–90; van Gompel, supra note 244, at 167–8.

  258. 258.

    Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1602–3; van Gompel, supra note 244, at 167–8.

  259. 259.

    Although commentator has indicated that, in some rare cases such as Berne-plus rights, it is possible to set certain formalization requirements on works, it is nevertheless not so helpful in terms of releasing massive amount of works to the public domain. See Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1602–3.

  260. 260.

    For example, Stef van Gompel has indicated that it is possible to re-introduce formalities in terms of rights clearance, but not those “for the purpose of enhancing the free flow of information by enlarging the public domain”. He further indicates that, in order to promote right clearance, “piecemeal approaches” such as making the protection of rights management information conditional and making the public registration of transfer of copyright possible could be adopted by contracting states. van Gompel, supra note 235, at 1456–7. See also van Gompel, supra note 244, at 213–88; Similarly, Prof. Ginsburg has found a declaratory measure that “conditioning validity of transfer of copyright on recordation of a note or memorandum of the transfer” is Berne-compatible. See Ginsburg, supra note 239, at 1621, see also van Gompel, supra note 235, at 1457. van Gompel, supra note 244, at 288.

  261. 261.

    Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 192 (explaining it as “a space where media and ideas could be freely exchanged to advance a directed cause”).

  262. 262.

    Noda, supra note 25 in Chap. 1, at 137 (claiming that this distinction “prevents their activities from eroding the copyright holder’s incentives”).

  263. 263.

    Kensaku Fukui (福井健策), Chosakuken o Ikasu ni wa Dejitaru kontentsu no kōzai (著作権を活かすには デジタルコンテンツの功罪) [In Exploiting Copyright: The Advantages and Disadvanteges of Digital Contents], Hummingheads.co.jp, Oct. 31, 2013, at http://www.hummingheads.co.jp/reports/interview/1310/131031_03.html.

  264. 264.

    In most cases, it contains warnings such as “not for commercial purposes”. See e.g., The Term of Use, Fansub-share.org, http://fansub-share.org/tou/.

  265. 265.

    Wu, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 633–35.

  266. 266.

    Preston, supra note 65 in Chap. 2.

  267. 267.

    Kincaid, supra Fig. 2.2 in Chap. 2 (“We can continue to push for more content releases by sending requests to the companies and, yes, still subbing and scanlating ethically. We need to keep in mind that we are partners with the people who create our favorite anime and manga. If we don’t do our part, they cannot continue to make the stories we enjoy.”).

  268. 268.

    P. B. Hugenholtz, Codes of Conduct and Copyright Enforcement in Cyberspace, in Copyright Enforcement And The Internet 307 (I.A. Stamatoudi, ed. 2010).

  269. 269.

    See Lele, supra note 16 in Chap. 2.

  270. 270.

    The four constraints are: the law, social norms, the market, and architecture. See Lessig, supra note 12 in Chap. 1, at 123.

  271. 271.

    Hugenholtz, supra note 268, at 305.

  272. 272.

    Id. at 306.

  273. 273.

    See supra Sect. 2.2.1 Challenges to the Copyright System.

  274. 274.

    A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. 239 F.3d (9th Cir. 2001).

  275. 275.

    MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. 545 U.S. 913 (2005).

  276. 276.

    See e.g., Mark A. Lemley, et al., Don’t Break the Internet, 64 Stan. L. Rev. Online 34, 36–37 (2011); Jie Wang (王杰), Meiguo SOPA Yian Pingxi Jiqi Dui Woguo Wangluo Zhishi Chanquan Lifa De Qishi (美国SOPA议案评析及其对我国网络知识产权立法的启示) [Analysis on SOPA and What Can Be Learned from SOPA for IP Legislation Under the Network Environment in China], Zhishi Chanquan (知识产权) [Intellectual Property], no. 8, 2012, at 90, 92–94.

  277. 277.

    See Generally Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1.

  278. 278.

    Lee, supra note 16 in Chap. 1, at 1473.

  279. 279.

    Fisher, supra note 23 in Chap. 1, at 1436.

  280. 280.

    Id. at 1436.

  281. 281.

    Id. at 1437.

  282. 282.

    Warner Bros. Entm’t Inc. v. RDR Books, 575 F. Supp. 2d 513 (S.D.N.Y. 2008).

  283. 283.

    Geonard F. Buttler II, Case Summary, Warner Bros. Entertainment and J.K. Rowling v. RDR Books and Does 1-10. 575 F. Supp. 2D 513, 19 DePaul J. Art Tech. & Intell. Prop. L. 421, 434 (2008). For a similar U.S. case in favor of the copyright owner, please see Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc. 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998).

  284. 284.

    The title “In Excess” evokes a connotation of N(aruto) and Sas(uke), the names of the two main characters of Naruto.

  285. 285.

    Natasha Bertrand, ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ Started Out as ‘Twilight’ Fan Fiction Before Becoming an International Phenomenon, Business Insider, Feb. 17, 2015, at http://uk.businessinsider.com/fifty-shades-of-grey-started-out-as-twilight-fan-fiction-2015-2?r=US.

  286. 286.

    Lee, supra note 16 in Chap. 1, at 1515–18.

  287. 287.

    See Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japanese Government Policies in Education, Science, Sports and Culture (2000), http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpae200001/hpae200001_2_079.html (“…film, animation, and manga (comics) have each established their own respective independent fields. They are also the foundation for new media arts, and as such, it will be necessary to further their promotion.”) (Japan).

  288. 288.

    Japan External Trade Org., supra note 426 in Chap. 3.

  289. 289.

    Japan to USA: Anime & Manga, Japan External Trade Org. U.S., http://www.jetro.org/usa/japanus/animemanga/.

  290. 290.

    Heng Shao, Animation Start-up ‘Light Chaser’ Scores Big Hit in China with First Short Film, Forbes, Mar. 27, 2014, at http://www.forbes.com/sites/hengshao/2014/03/27/animation-start-up-light-chaser-scores-big-hit-in-china-with-first-short-film/ (“The Chinese animation industry that Wang has plunged into is one with high speed growth but low quality products. Since 2010, its total output value has grown at an average rate of 30% a year, to $12 billion at the end of 2012.”).

  291. 291.

    Nan Jiang (江南), Zhongguo Dongman Chanye Fazhan Fenxi (中国动漫产业发展分析) [Analysis of the development of China’s Animation Industry], Jin Chuanmei (今传媒) [Today’s Massmedia], no. 1, 2014, at 114.

  292. 292.

    Kuishi Zhongguo Chuangyi Chanye de Bingshan Yijiao – Dongman Chanye (窥视中国创意产业的冰山一角—动漫产业) [Looking into the Creative Industry of China – the Animation Industry], Ling Dian Zhi Biao Shu Ju (零点指标数据) [HorizonKey], Jul. 26, 2011, available at http://www.horizonkey.com/c/cn/news/2011-07/26/news_1516.html.

  293. 293.

    Noda, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 65.

  294. 294.

    See supra Sect. 2.1.2 Fanfics, Doujinshis, and Scanlations.

  295. 295.

    Ko-Ichi Ichikawa, The Comic Market Today and Overseas Participants, 2009, http://www.comiket.co.jp/info-a/C77/C77CMKSymposiumPresentationEnglish.pdf (“Chronology of General Attendees and Participating Circles Statistics”).

  296. 296.

    Comiket 82 Ties ‘Turnstile’ Attendance Record at 560,000, Anime News Network, Aug. 13, 2012, http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2012-08-13/comiket-82-ties-turnstile-attendance-record-at-560000.

  297. 297.

    Lessig, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 26; See also Kinsella, supra note 74 in Chap. 2, at 109 (indicated that making doujinshi is deemed as the first step to become a successful manga artist by many practitioners); Tuuli Bollmann, He-Romance for Her – Yaoi, BL and Shounen-ai, in Imaginary Japan: Japanese Fantasy in Contemporary Popular Culture 45 (Eija Niskanen eds. 2010) (noted that the doujinshi authors tend to produce infringing articles even after they became professional manga authors).

  298. 298.

    Mehra, supra note 26 in Chap. 1, at 180 n.136.

  299. 299.

    Fukuda Makoto, Spurious Revival: Doraemon’s ‘Final’ Fanzine Episode Ignites Copyright Alarms, Daily Yomiuri, Jun. 17, 2007, reprinted at http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/07/08/lifestyle/lifestyle_30039868.php.

  300. 300.

    Id.

  301. 301.

    Id.

  302. 302.

    John E. Ingulsrud & Kate Allen, Reading Japan Cool: Patterns of Manga Literacy and Discourse 49 (2009).

  303. 303.

    Noda, supra note 25 in Chap. 1, at 156–57.

  304. 304.

    Id.

  305. 305.

    Id.

  306. 306.

    Press Release, Japanese Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers, Open Letter to Chad Hurley, CEO, and Steve Chen, CTO, YouTube, Dec. 4, 2006, at http://www.jasrac.or.jp/release/06/12_2.html.

  307. 307.

    See Tokyo Anime Center Posts “Stop! Fan-Subtitle” Notice, Anime News Network, Mar. 29, 2008, http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-03-29/tokyo-anime-center-posts-stop-fan-subtitle-notice.

  308. 308.

    Charles Solomon, File Share and Share Alike, N.Y. Times, Aug. 21, 2005, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/21/arts/21solo.html.

  309. 309.

    Japan External Trade Org., supra note 426 in Chap. 3.

  310. 310.

    For instance, China Hunan TV has opened its own official channel in YouTube and uploaded most its hottest variety shows for free streaming. See China Hunan TV Official Channel, YouTube, at https://www.youtube.com/user/imgotv; TV shows such as The Voice of China were also uploaded shortly after the original broadcasting by numerous YouTube users.

  311. 311.

    In China, some telesync versions of currently screening domestic movies have shown up on some small sites, but this issue is negligible considering its social influence and the purpose of this article.

  312. 312.

    VeryCD Qi Si Hui Sheng Qi Qishi: Zhuan Xing Wang Ye You Xi Yue Shou Ru Guo Yi (VeryCD起死回生启示:转型网页游戏月收入过亿) [The Inspiration of VeryCD: Making Hundreds of Millions After Transforming], Wang Yi 163(网易163) [NetEase], Jan. 13, 2012, at http://tech.163.com/12/0114/09/7NNH9TGK000915BF.html (China).

  313. 313.

    See, e.g., Tudou Announces Exclusive License Agreement with TV Tokyo to Simulcast Japanese Anime, PR Newswire, Nov. 28, 2011, http://en.prnasia.com/pr/2011/11/28/USCN1281911.shtml.

  314. 314.

    For a good example, see the Naruto page on VeryCD.com, http://www.verycd.com/topics/2849835/. To summarize, a user can find download pages under the “resource” category; however, if the user is not registered (which is available free), has not contributed to the group up to a certain level, and/or has not earned a “silver medal,” he or she will see a notice that says “this resource is lacking the certificate of rights, therefore the download links for it are unavailable.” Conversely, if the user is registered and has satisfied all of the above-mentioned criteria, he or she will see all the download links after logging in.

  315. 315.

    Dang Nian Ming Yue (当年明月), Epilogue, in Mingchao Naxie Shier 7 (明朝那些事儿7) [7 Those Stories of the Ming Dynasty] (2009).

  316. 316.

    During an interview of the Hong Kong Book Fair 2011, Cixin Liu explicitly mentioned that although he “doesn’t like fanfics” because they will “block the way” of his future writing of that series, but he had nonetheless given his permission for the publication of Three Body X. The live recording of his interview can be retrieved at: http://115.com/file/dn6l573a.

  317. 317.

    Shanshan Li (李珊珊), Liu Cixin Rang Women Yangwang Xingkong Ba (刘慈欣 让我们仰望星空吧) [Liu Cixin Lets Look into the Sky], Nanfang Zhoumo (南方周末) [Southern Weekly], Jun. 26, 2012, at http://www.infzm.com/content/59075.

  318. 318.

    Copyright Dispute Kicks Migrant Singers Out of Spring, Xinhua News, Feb. 13, 2011, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-02/13/c_13730008.htm.

  319. 319.

    For example, the newly revised Article 119(3) of the JCL proves that the content industry is trying to control the behavior of domestic Internet users, as it criminalizes the private downloading of copyrighted works to some extent. Japanese Copyright Law, art. 119 (3); Moreover, a controversial clause was inserted as an amendment after the original bill had been submitted, by which it escaped the deliberation of the education ministry and was passed by the National Diet. In other words, it is largely an end product of industrial lobbying. See Tomoko Otake, Music Industry Wins a Battle as Antidownloading Bill Gets Some Teeth, Japan Times, June 21, 2012, http://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2012/06/21/culture/music-industry-wins-a-battle-as-antidownloading-bill-gets-some-teeth/.

  320. 320.

    For instance, in 2011, Funimation, a large animation streaming website in the United States that has released a considerable amount of Japanese anime since 1994, sued 1,337 downloaders over one of their imported titles, One Piece, for which the company had acquired licenses from Toei in 2009. The beginning of similar legal actions can be traced back to 2005. A full list of their licensed works can be found here: http://www.funimation.tv/shows/, for a cache version of the old page: http://changedmy.name/funimation-license-mirror/.

  321. 321.

    Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 196.

  322. 322.

    Id. at 192.

  323. 323.

    Id.

  324. 324.

    Anderson, supra note 5 in Chap. 1, at 162–70.

  325. 325.

    Wu, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 630.

  326. 326.

    Gordon, supra note 214, at 1628.

  327. 327.

    Lessig, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 27.

  328. 328.

    Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 239 (“They lacked expertise in the field of international intellectual property law.”).

  329. 329.

    How Much Money Do Doujinshi Creators Actually Make? Some Statistics from Comiket, Fanhackers Blog, Jun. 10, 2012, at http://fanhackers.transformativeworks.org/2012/06/how-much-money-do-doujinshi-creators-actually-make-some-statistics-from-comiket/.

  330. 330.

    Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 257.

  331. 331.

    Id. at 265.

  332. 332.

    Matthew P. McAllister, Consumer Culture and New Media: Commodity Fetishism in the Digital Era, in Media Perspectives for the 21st Century: Concepts, Topics and Issues 161–62 (S. Papathanassopoulos ed. 2010).

  333. 333.

    Henry Jenkins, When Piracy Becomes Promotion, Reason, Dec. 2006, at http://reason.com/archives/2006/11/17/when-piracy-becomes-promotion.

  334. 334.

    McAllister, supra note 332, at 161–62.

  335. 335.

    Lee, supra note 16 in Chap. 1, at 1486–87.

  336. 336.

    William Gruger, PSY’s ‘Gangnam Style’ Video Hits 1 Billion Views, Unprecedented Milestone, Billboard, Dec 21, 2012, at http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/1483733/psys-gangnam-style-video-hits-1-billion-views-unprecedented-milestone.

  337. 337.

    Celebrities such as Britney Spears and Katy Perry had given their props to the song through tweeter and blog, see Bary Alyssa Johnson, ‘Gangnam Style’ Fans Include Britney Spears, Katy Perry, Vanessa Hudgens; What They Tweeted, Latinos Post, Aug 29, 2012, at http://www.latinospost.com/articles/3457/20120829/celeb-tweets-show-gangnam-style-taking-over-hollywood.htm; for fan-made videos of the song, see e.g., Mischievious Studios, Gotham Style, YouTube, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSsCU3FcOkw; WhatsUpELLE, Baby Gangnam Style Parody, YouTube, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iheCrwQQlI; popking161, I Love Beijing Style, YouTube, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7xfAfa4W7E.

  338. 338.

    Psy Gangnam Styles His Way to the Bank in China, WantChinaTimes, Feb. 6, 2013, at http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20130206000001&cid=1304.

  339. 339.

    Deborah L. Jacobs, Parodies of Rap Artist Psy’s Gangnam Style are Fun. But are They Legal?, Forbes, Sep. 10, 2012, at http://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2012/10/09/parodies-of-rap-artist-psys-gangnam-style-are-fun-but-are-they-legal-2/.

  340. 340.

    Glyn Moody, Psy Makes $8.1 Million by Ignoring Copyright Infringements of Gangnam Style, Techdirt, Dec. 10, 2012, at https://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121209/07431921317/psy-makes-81-million-ignoring-copyright-infringements-gangnam-style.shtml.

  341. 341.

    Saul Hansell, Bits Debate: On the Rights of Readers and Viewers, N.Y. Times Bits Blog, Jan. 18, 2008, at http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/bits-debate-on-the-rights-of-readers-andviewers (“… most major content owners today want to see fans fully engage with their favorite content and are working hard to provide legitimate ways to do that.”).

  342. 342.

    See supra Sect. 4.4.2.2.3 China.

  343. 343.

    Anderson, supra note 35 in Chap. 1, at 53–57.

  344. 344.

    Id. at 53.

  345. 345.

    See generally, Searching for Sugar Man (Red Box Film Productions 2012).

  346. 346.

    Prison Break (Fox television broadcast Aug. 29, 2005).

  347. 347.

    See Osnos, supra note 293 in Chap. 3.

  348. 348.

    See Ingyu Oh, Hallyu: The Rise of Transnational Cultural Consumers in China and Japan, 40 Korea Observer 425, 440–444 (2009); for the Japanese part, see Joseph M Chan, Toward Television Regionalization in Greater China and Beyond, in TV China 33 (Ying Zhu & Chris Berry eds., 2009); for a greater China perspective, see Kelly Hu, The Power of Circulation: Digital Technologies and the Online Chinese Fans of Japanese TV Drama, 6 Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 171, 171–173 (2005); Nissim Kadosh Otmazgin, Contesting Soft Power: Japanese Popular Culture in East and Southeast Asia, 8 International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 73, 85 (2008) (“East Asia’s pirated markets thus paved the way for the Japanese popular culture industries’ entry into new markets. The informal circulation of pirated versions of Japanese popular culture has effectively popularized the products in the markets they were legally banned from”); Ming-tsung Lee, Traveling with Japanese TV dramas: Cross-cultural Orientation and Flowing Identification of Contemporary Taiwanese Youth, in Feeling Asian Modernities: Transnational Consumption of Japanese TV Drama 132–33 (Iwabuchi Kōichi ed. 2004) (“Owing to…the easy acquisition of various pirated audiovisual products, the spread of Japanese TV dramas in Taiwan became increasingly quick, direct, and widespread.”).

  349. 349.

    See e.g., Osnos, supra note 293 in Chap. 3; the success of the so-called “Korean wave” in Asian countries is believed to be partly due to pirate sales. See also Woongjae Ryoo, Globalization, or the Logic of Cultural Hybridization: the Case of the Korean Wave, 19 Asian Journal of Communication 137, 139 (2009).

  350. 350.

    For instance, after more than a decade of pirate dumping, two main Chinese video platforms Iqiyi and PPS had acquired the network broadcasting rights of My Love from The Star–a South Korean television series has been voted as the No. 1 TV series among South Koreans. On Iqiyi alone, it has been watched 14.5 billion times since its December debut. See Lilian Lin, Korean TV Show Sparks Chicken and Beer Craze in China, The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 26, 2014, at http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/02/26/korean-tv-show-sparks-chicken-and-beer-craze-in-china/. Interestingly, a 2013 research done by Seoul University had pointed out that people who watch Korean dramas are at the bottom end of the socio-economic and educational ladder. Jeyup S. Kwaak, South Korean Soap Operas: Just Lowbrow Fun?, The Wall Street Journal, Jul. 23, 2013, at http://blogs.wsj.com/korearealtime/2013/07/23/south-korean-soap-operas-just-lowbrow-fun-2/. In 2014, fans of the Star drama had spent more than 20 thousand euros, brought a full-page ad in a Korean newspaper, claiming the conclusion of that research is wrong, and required that professor to apologize. And the author did apologize subsequently. Alex Stevens, The Chinese Are Pissed That Koreans Called Them Dumb for Watching Korean Dramas, Shanghaist, Mar. 22, 2014, at http://shanghaiist.com/2014/03/22/chinese-say-we-are-not-stupid-for-watching-korean-dramas.php.

  351. 351.

    For the US-China copyright debate, See generally, Yu, supra note 106 in Chap. 3; For South Korea’s attitude towards piracy in China, See e.g., Roald Maliangkay, Keep Your Enemies Closer: Protecting Korea’s Pop Culture in China, 2 Korean Histories 34, 35 (2010); for Japan’s actions against piracy in China, See e.g., Kyodo, Crackdown on intellectual property piracy pays off, The Japan Times, Mar. 5, 2012, at http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/03/05/national/crackdown-on-intellectual-property-piracy-pays-off/#.U7btIo2SzX0. For fan activities, see e.g., Tokyo Anime Center Posts “Stop! Fan-Subtitle” Notice, Animenewsnetwork, Mar. 29, 2008, at http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-03-29/tokyo-anime-center-posts-stop-fan-subtitle-notice.

  352. 352.

    Charles Piller, How Piracy Opens Doors for Windows, Los Angeles Times, Apr. 9, 2006, at http://articles.latimes.com/2006/apr/09/business/fi-micropiracy9 (“Although about 3 million computers are sold every year in China, people don’t pay for the software. Someday they will, though,” Gates told an audience at the University of Washington. “And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They’ll get sort of addicted, and then we’ll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade.”).

  353. 353.

    See e.g., Kelly Hu, Chinese Re-making of Pirated VCDs of Japanese TV Dramas, in Feeling Asian Modernities: Transnational Consumption of Japanese TV Drama 205–226 (Iwabuchi Kōichi ed. 2004); see also Otmazgin, supra note 348, at 85, n.17; Beng Huat Chua, Structure of Identification and Distancing in Watching East Asian Television Drama, in East Asian Pop Culture: Analysing the Korean Wave 86 (Beng Huat Chua & Kōichi Iwabuchi eds., 2008); Maliangkay, supra note 351, at 35 (“…the Korean government had for long showed little concern over the loss of revenue incurred by foreign companies as a result of domestic piracy or the production of counterfeits…”).

  354. 354.

    See e.g., Shuling Huang, Nation-branding and Transnational Consumption: Japan-mania and the Korean Wave in Taiwan, 33 Media, Culture & Society 3, 8–9 (2011).

  355. 355.

    See e.g., Otmazgin, supra note 348, at 83–84.

  356. 356.

    Kanemitsu, supra note 397 in Chap. 3.

  357. 357.

    Japanese Copyright Law, art. 28.

  358. 358.

    Id. art. 20(1).

  359. 359.

    See supra Sect. 3.1 Barriers or Defenders: The Failure Caused by the Great “Cultural” Wall of China.

  360. 360.

    Interview with Nakamura Kimihiko via Email, Legal Advisor, Tokyo Broadcasting System Television (Nov. 19, 2012).

  361. 361.

    Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 217.

  362. 362.

    See generally He, supra note 123 in Chap. 2; Mehra, supra note 26 in Chap. 1.

  363. 363.

    For a detailed discussion about consumer labour in advertising, please see McAllister, supra note 332, at 158–62.

  364. 364.

    Leonard, supra note 11 in Chap. 2, at 287.

  365. 365.

    Wu, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 619.

  366. 366.

    See Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 253–55.

  367. 367.

    See Kanemitsu, supra note 397.

  368. 368.

    See Hiroko Tabuchi, Why Japan’s Cellphones Haven’t Gone Global, N.Y. Times, July 19, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/technology/20cell.html (the report notes that the Japanese cellphone industry has excellent products but failed to go oversea, because that fast development “turned increasingly inward”, and the industry was satisfied with the rapid growth of the local cellphone market in the late 1990s and early 2000s, they were in lack of incentives to go abroad. This phenomenon is named the “Galápagos syndrome.” The term was initially used to describe the Japanese 3G cellphones, but now is being used for similar phenomena in other markets). Anime is apparently qualified as one of those: anime is unique to other markets, because Japanese use animation as a media rather than a genre and sometimes their products contain adult features, their anime is facing lots of restrictions outside Japan; the industry was content with its local market, and lack of incentives to explore foreign markets. Accord Leonard, supra note 28 in Chap. 1, at 229–34.

  369. 369.

    For a detailed discussion and possible solution regarding this issue, please see infra Sect. 5.2.2.3 Example.

  370. 370.

    See Lee, supra note 16 in Chap. 1, at 1485.

  371. 371.

    Lessig, supra note 39 in Chap. 1, at 109–114; Chris Anderson also noted this problem from another angle, he described a younger generation that insists “on Free not just in price but also in the absence of restrictions: They resist registration barriers, copyright control schemes, and content that they can’t own.” See Anderson, supra note 5 in Chap. 1, at 191.

  372. 372.

    See generally He, supra note 123 in Chap. 2.

  373. 373.

    Piller, supra note 352.

  374. 374.

    See generally, Lydia Pallas Loren, Building a Reliable Semicommons of Creative Works: Enforcement of Creative Commons Licenses and Limited Abandonment of Copyright, 14 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 271 (2006).

  375. 375.

    See generally, Yafit Lev-Aretz, Second Level Agreements, 45 Akron L. Rev. 137 (2012).

  376. 376.

    Creative Commons is a non-profit organization that enables the sharing and use of creativity and knowledge through free legal tools. Creative Commons, About Us, https://creativecommons.org/about (last visited Apr. 4, 2014).

  377. 377.

    “No Action Policy” is “a unilateral, non-exclusive, potentially revocable license from the media owner to all members of the general public who meet its terms.” See Wu, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 634.

  378. 378.

    Loren, supra note 374, at 276–277.

  379. 379.

    Wu, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 634; Todd D. Marcus, Fostering Creativity in Virtual Worlds: Easing the Restrictiveness of Copyright for User-created Content, 55 J. Copyright Soc’y U.S.A. 469, 489 (2008).

  380. 380.

    Christopher S. Brown, Copyleft, the Disguised Copyright: Why Legislative Copyright Reform is Superior to Copyleft Licenses, 78 UMKC L. Rev. 749, 766–777 (2009).

  381. 381.

    Wu, supra note 42 in Chap. 1, at 634.

  382. 382.

    Id. at 625.

  383. 383.

    Id. at 628.

  384. 384.

    Id. at 633.

  385. 385.

    Id. at 618.

  386. 386.

    See Lessig, supra note 39 in Chap. 1, at 177 (…one that builds upon both the sharing and commercial economies, one that adds value to each.).

  387. 387.

    See supra Sects. 4.4.1 and 4.4.2.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R., People’s Republic of China

    Tianxiang He

Authors
  1. Tianxiang He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tianxiang He .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

He, T. (2017). A Comparative Examination of Fan Activities Under Current Legal Frameworks of the United States, China, and Japan. In: Copyright and Fan Productivity in China. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6508-8_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6508-8_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6507-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6508-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation