Start organizing and implementing the construction of national economic informatization projects. Now, the "gold" series of projects represented by the "three gold" projects have made substantial progress.

Building a globally interconnected computer information network involves "roads" (networks), "cars"

(application software) and "goods" (databases, multimedia products and other knowledge forms).

Manufacturing, maintenance and management of goods). The construction and operation of information highways equipped with network technology, digital technology and multimedia technology, and the resulting new information products and services have an impact on existing knowledge

The property rights system itself poses serious challenges. The most representative one is the intellectual property issues derived from the internal operations and services of the information network. If this problem is not solved well, it may cause "road problems" in the information network. "Although it is connected in all directions, there are very few "vehicles" or there are

"cars" but no "cargo", which hinders the development of the information highway. Therefore, how to adjust and improve the current intellectual property system to meet the needs of national information infrastructure has attracted the attention of developed countries and relevant international organizations.

On September 5, 1995, the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (WGIPR) under the U.S. Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF) submitted A white paper on "Intellectual Property and National Information Infrastructure" was published. Mainly discusses copyright law and its application and impact on

information adjustment highway. In addition to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the U.S. Copyright Office, those participating in the drafting of the white paper include the U.S. Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Finance, and the National Science and Technology Department. 26 national departments and institutions including foundations*1. This shows the importance attached to it.

The European Commission published a Green Paper*2 entitled "Copyright and

Related Rights in the Information Society" on July 19, 1995, which mainly proposed that copyright and related rights Application issues in new products and services in the information society

Some legal and technical concepts closely related to the effective exercise of copyright

But it does not discuss the internal operation of information networks and the Copyright issues caused by network services

Unlike the US government's white paper, the European Commission's green paper did not include the protection of industrial property rights in its discussion scope.

A committee commissioned by the French Minister of Culture and chaired by Professor Sirinelli submitted a report entitled "Industrial Culture and New Technologies" in July 1994. ” report

(also known as the Sirinelli Report), *3 elaborated on the composition of the disintegration of the multimedia field and the future development trend of multimedia, and analyzed this trend Impact on copyright and industrial property rights.

Since multimedia has the dual meaning of information media and communication means, it has the same purpose as the information highway

So when Americans use the term information highway to describe the emerging media

p>

When the information revolution started, the Japanese vigorously promoted the multimedia revolution. In 1993, the Intellectual Property Research Institute under the Ministry of International Trade and Industry of Japan submitted an interim report on "Proposal on the New Impact of Intellectual Property on Multimedia", focusing on the establishment of a responsible Multimedia copyright merger and authorization, the possibility of a copyright clearing center and the issue of the integrity of the work. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan submitted two reports on multimedia and copyright protection in November 1993 and February 1995 respectively. *4

Relevant organizations in Canada and Australia were commissioned by various governments and submitted "Copyright

Copyrights and the Information Highway" *5 and "In the New Communication Environment "Copyright" special report

. *6

Russia promulgated the Federal Law "On Information, Informatization and Information Security" on February 22, 1995

and drafted the "Trade Secrets Law" and the "Personal Protection Law" Privacy Act.

At the same time, suggestions were made to add computer crimes and crimes of infringement of trade secrets to the new criminal code of the Russian Federation. *7

In order to build the main legal framework for regulating computer information network space, the German government submitted the "Information Services and Communications Services Act" to the Bundesrat on December 20, 1996

Article 7 of the draft proposes to amend the existing copyright law and add new provisions to protect databases

. *8

At the diplomatic conference held at the end of last year, the World Intellectual Property Organization, in order to coordinate the construction of information highway

"The Treaty on Certain Questions Concerning the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works" and the "Treaty on the Protection of the Rights of Performers and Producers of Phonograms" were adopted. The draft "Intellectual Property Rights Treaty on Databases" will be reviewed and adopted this year. *9The European Union promulgated the "European Forum and

EU Council Directive on the Legal Protection of Databases" in February 1996. *10

In recent years, the issue of copyright protection in the information highway has attracted the attention of relevant people in my country

. As early as December 1993, at the Cross-Strait Symposium on Copyright Issues, scholars from both sides of the Taiwan Strait discussed the impact of digital technology and networking technology on existing copyright theory and practice.

At the National Copyright Theory Seminar held in October 1995, participants held a special discussion on the impact of digital technology

on copyright. In May last year, the World Intellectual Property Organization and my country's *** jointly held a seminar on digital technology copyright in Beijing. At the National Symposium on the Revision of Copyright Law held in June last year, the participants had a heated discussion on issues such as the protection of digital works and multimedia works.

2. Information Highway and Copyright Protection

In computer information networks, different works can be converted into binary numbers through digital technology for storage and processing.

transmission. Online users can directly or indirectly transmit perfect copies of such digital works to other users' email servers, or to all users on the Internet who provide information. On the "Bulletin

Board System (BBS) for query and publishing services. In this way, other users can retrieve these

information or works through the BBS. If necessary, they can print unlimited copies of these works on paper or

copy them on the hard disk. In addition, online users can also easily combine

process copyrighted works online with the help of digital technology. Therefore, the rights of the original copyright holder such as the right to reproduce and the integrity of the work are subject to strong challenges online. So someone asked, can the current copyright law and its basic theories still meet the needs of rapid private development of digital technology? There are two completely different views on this matter in the United States. One believes that the existing copyright law should be retained without modification; the opponents propose that the current copyright law should be comprehensively reformed. WGIPR believes that the current copyright law can provide sufficient protection for relevant rights with only a few modifications and necessary explanations. *11 According to the European Union Green Paper, the emergence of new technologies will not affect the basic theories and principles of copyright and related rights. *12 The conclusion of the French Sirinelli report is: Although digital technology has broadened the scope of dissemination of works and enabled the emergence of new forms of works, this technological change will not be widespread in all areas.

Facing the impact of copyright law. *13

Throughout the history of copyright law, copyright law has always been in the process of responding to the challenges of science and technology

. *14 The current question is, with the impact of digital technology, can the current copyright law still be applicable? It should be pointed out that the concept of current copyright law was gradually formed based on printing technology to a large extent.

*15 After the invention of printing technology, most of the works protected by copyright law were directly materialized in a certain arrangement and combination of text and graphic signals on a single carrier. The main products produced from this are written works and artistic works. Since then, audio recording, film and television works have been born one after another with the emergence of tapes, video tapes and other carriers and the invention of analog technology. The production process is to use analog technology to convert text, sound, etc.

signals into machine-recognizable analog signals through recording and playback devices, and then use the same device to restore them into signals that people can directly

Receive audio-visual original works. Compared with the conversion process of text works based on printing, it only adds a process of machine simulation signal, and the works before and after simulation have not changed.

So the emergence of technologies such as simulation, recording, and film has not shaken the theoretical foundation of copyright law, which is mainly formed by printing.

However, the storage, dissemination and use of works have taken a step forward compared to the era of printing. It is more likely that copyrighted works will be used by others without authorization. However, the copyright law at that time only made appropriate adjustments to adapt to changes in this aspect (such as re-limiting the scope of "fair use"). The difference between digital technology and analog technology is that the latter converts the work into a machine-recognizable analog signal, while the former converts the work through direct conversion or simulation - —Convert the number into a machine (computer) readable binary

digital form. However, after the work is digitized, just like the work after it is simulated, the same device (computer) can also use the same device (computer) to convert the machine-readable digital original form (if people do not actively process and change them). >The original storage state in the device or a certain carrier). The digitization process of works is also an intermediate technical process, which is purely mechanical code transformation and does not involve the creative labor of a third person other than the original author. Since works originate from human creation, *16 works protected by copyright law actually embody the author's creative labor. Therefore, this intermediate technical process will not produce new

works. Moreover, it is the device, not the person, that plays the leading role in the process of digital conversion of works. The device itself has no creative ability. Therefore, the digitization process of the work will not impart new creativity to the original work, nor will it create a new author, and the copyright will still belong to the original author. *17

It can be concluded that the transformation of information processing technology from analog to digital is not a qualitative change.

The basic principles of the current copyright law still apply.

However, due to the emergence of digital technology, multimedia technology and network technology, the storage of works

has become multimedia, and its dissemination has become more extensive and convenient. Therefore, in multimedia works,

On the issues of copyright protection and ownership of rights and interests in electronic databases and new information network services

, requirements for adjustment, enrichment and modification of the current copyright law have been put forward.

The traditional storage media for works include paper, tape, disk, video tape, etc., and one

carrier can generally only store a single information medium. With the rapid development of multimedia technology,

it is now possible to combine text, numbers, graphics in literary works, artistic works, photographic works, musical works, animation works,

film and television works, etc. , static and dynamic images, sounds and other different information media are stored on a single carrier at the same time, such as a read-only disk (CD-ROM),

thus producing a A so-called multimedia work, *18 enables people to read and appreciate works with pictures, text, and sounds and shapes with the help of computers. However, this form of work that integrates a variety of traditional works makes the dividing line between traditional works blurred. If

the classification of multimedia works is improper, it will inevitably affect the exercise and restriction of their rights.

According to Section 101 of the U.S. Copyright Law, audiovisual works refer to "a series of machines and equipment such as projectors, viewfinders, or electronic devices that are produced with genuine intent

4 Related images displayed.

”

This shows that audiovisual works in U.S. law also contain static images, or at least are related to them. Based on the characteristics of multimedia works

the U.S. White Paper recommends that multimedia works as a whole It can be regarded as

an audiovisual or audiovisual work (audiovisual work). *19 The proposal of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan

believes that the current concept of "multimedia work" or "audiovisual work" can be replaced. Copyright Law

For the definition of film works, the provisions on film works in the current law may be separately revised.

Multimedia works will be directly classified as film works. *20 Article 20 of my country’s Copyright Law. Item 5 of Article 3 and Item 9 of Article 4 of the Implementation Regulations of the Copyright Law only define film, television and video works.

It is stipulated that such works refer to "filmed in In a certain material sense, it consists of a series of pictures with or without accompanying sound, and is projected and played with the help of appropriate devices. "In the author's opinion, the above regulations basically summarize the main attributes of multimedia works. However, it seems inappropriate to classify multimedia works into film, television, and video works. Whether film, television, video and multimedia works can be collectively referred to as audio-visual works on the basis of the existing regulations, and the concept and scope of audio-visual works should be clearly defined and formulated. Necessary explanation.

"Originality" is the primary condition for a work to be protected by copyright law. However, many countries have inconsistent standards for judging the "originality" of a work in multimedia. When most of the works are adapted and combined from existing copyrighted works, to what extent can they meet the requirements of "originality" from a micro perspective? Generally speaking, multimedia works have the characteristics of certain types of databases

It is generally believed that even if a multimedia work is based on an existing copyrighted work, the creator has no choice but to select the work. The arrangement and combination reflect intellectual creation, and copyright protection should also be provided for synthesized multimedia works. However, since such multimedia works are based on existing copyrighted works, The copyright should be protected as a neighboring right.

The production of a multimedia work often involves multiple works and multiple authors. If

the existing copyrighted works are not obtained first. Authorization from the copyright owner without indicating the author and the source of the work may constitute infringement. *21 However, it is required to obtain each multimedia work one by one from the producer himself.

Authorization by the original author is by no means easy. The difficulties faced by domestic artist groups in developing a set of multimedia software are an obvious example. *22 For protection

The original author has exclusive rights to his works and is convenient for multimedia producers to use. Japan and the United States have proposed the idea of ??establishing a works clearing center and a multimedia clearing agency to represent copyright owners

The unified authorization business of personnel copyrights is to issue work licenses to users, and collect royalties and then issue them to copyright owners in a certain proportion. my country currently only establishes the protection of musical works

The China Music Copyright Association is responsible for the rights of copyright owners, as well as the copyright collection and transfer center.

However, how to establish a collective management organization for the protection of copyright owners' rights in various works in my country? /p>

How to legally position these institutions? Is it necessary for these institutions to sign standard licensing contracts with media producers and users? Can the contract be resolved? *23 If so, can it be presumed that modifications to the original work, such as dubbing, dubbing, adding subtitles, reorganization, and splicing, are allowed? This is something we urgently need to resolve when revising

the copyright law.

The rapid development of network technology, especially the emergence of the Internet, has made the dissemination of works more extensive and convenient. Some online users can anonymously upload information to the Internet or download online information to their computers for storage without providing their

user IDs and computer addresses. This leads to at least the following two questions.

First of all, what kind of behavior constitutes copying after digital works are transmitted online? According to the views of the United States, the European Union and Japan, *24 the following behaviors should be considered copying. ① Store a work or object of neighboring rights in any offline digital storage (such as CD-ROM); ② Scan a

printed matter into a digital document; ③ Digitize a work or object of neighboring rights; ④ Take out a

digital document from a user's computer and upload it to a BBS or other information server; ⑤

From a BBS or Download a digital document from other information servers; ⑥ Transfer a document from a computer network user to another computer user; ⑦ Store or even temporarily store a work or neighbor

The connected object is in a computer memory (such as random access memory RAM).

The right of reproduction is the core of copyright and related rights. It allows the copyright owner to authorize or prevent anyone from copying a protected work. Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Berne Convention stipulates that the author of a literary work shall have the exclusive right to authorize the reproduction of such work “in any manner” or “in any form”. Rights, this is a broad term, which should cover various known and unknown copying methods, including in principle all the above-mentioned copying methods. However, Article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention stipulates: "The laws of the Member States of the Union may permit the reproduction of the above-mentioned works under certain special circumstances, provided that such reproduction does not It will not conflict with the normal use of the work and will not unreasonably infringe the legitimate rights and interests of the author." This is one of the most controversial provisions in the Convention. Since different countries have different interpretations of this, the scope of "under certain special circumstances" mentioned in Article 9, paragraph 2, is uncertain.

Copyright laws in most countries in the world stipulate that the right of reproduction is granted to the copyist for reasonable personal use.

Personal use is generally regarded as an exception to the right of reproduction. However, the traditional examples of copyright law

have been greatly challenged by the emergence of external copying technology and audio and video technology. With the increasing number of individual users on the Internet, if they store or copy copyrighted works on the Internet in different forms without authorization, it is for commercial purposes only. It is still a personal reference, and the boundaries are more difficult to draw.

Therefore, developed countries recommend strict restrictions on the copying of digital works in the digital environment.

Article 52 of my country’s Copyright Law stipulates that copying “refers to making a copy of a work by printing, copying, copying, enlarging

printing, recording, videotaping, dubbing, or photographing, etc. or multiple acts”

. Although the above-mentioned seven copying methods in the digital environment recognized by foreign countries are not explicitly listed in this article, they can generally be considered to be implicit in the endless examples of "etc. methods". In fact, there are more than seven ways of copying in the digital environment. Therefore, it seems unnecessary to amend the copyright law to clarify in Article 52 the digitization or other reproduction methods of the

works. As for whether the seventh behavior above constitutes copying, I think it is worth debating. This is because this behavior only causes the work to be stored in the computer memory temporarily, or it is so short-lived that it is impossible for the computer user to display, read, or listen to all or most of the work. , in essence, it will not pose any threat to the effective exercise of the right of reproduction of the copyright owner of the work. If it is determined to be copying, it will be almost harsh.

Secondly, closely related to the above-mentioned copying behavior is the issue of distribution rights after the work is online.

When it comes to the relationship between the right of reproduction and the right of distribution when information is transmitted over the Internet, World Intellectual Property

Memorandum of the 1987 WIPO Committee of Governmental Experts Meeting on the Printed Word " pointed out: "The traditional (printing) reproduction mode of written works and engraving works is to issue copies after the copying is completed. And computers are used to store or transmit written works and engravings to the public. When a work is engraved, copies are issued during (simultaneous) reproduction. … When transmitted or distributed by electronic means, distribution is part of the copying or distribution process.

It seems necessary to recognize this implicit right of distribution based on the right of reproduction"*25

In the information network, it is easy for people to copy a computer software from a Once the transfer is completed, the original copy usually remains on the sender's computer. Copies of the copy are transferred to one or more computers of the recipient. Therefore, the U.S. White Paper considers that *26 the digital dissemination of online information (works). It should be regarded as a distribution act and should be restricted by the distribution right. What is different from the traditional distribution concept is that the traditional distribution of copies of works (such as book sales and video rentals) It means that the publisher is separated from the copy of the work he owns. When sending or distributing a copy of the work through the network, the sender or distributor's copy still exists in the computer, and only the copy he sends or distributes

It is a new copy of the copy.

According to Article 5, Item 5 of the Implementation Regulations of my country's Copyright Law, distribution is "for the purpose of satisfying

the public. Provide a certain number of copies of works to the public through sale, rental, etc. upon reasonable demand.

"So, can the online transmission of the above-mentioned works after digitization be classified as a rental activity (if online users pay to rent the works transmitted online)? If the classification is inappropriate, is it necessary? What about clarifying the digital online transmission of works as "distribution" when amending the Copyright Law?

Thirdly, closely related to the right of distribution is the so-called "distribution" that restricts it. First Sale Doctrine or Exhaustion Theory. Section 109(a) of the U.S. Copyright Act applies to this A theory provides an accurate explanation

that "the legal owner of any legally produced or copied work has the right to sell it to others without the permission of the copyright owner of the work

All copies or reproductions of, or other disposition of, that work. ”

*27 This shows that the copyright owner’s control over his work only extends to before the copies of the work are sold.

Once the copies are sold, rented or distributed, their distribution rights It is exhausted and may not be used again

However, U.S. law stipulates that the owner of a copy of a computer software or a recording of a sound recording may not use it for the purpose of direct or indirect profit. The reason for renting or lending the copy or record is that people can obtain high-quality copies at a much lower cost than making such originals. *28

The US White Paper believes that. The "first sale theory" does not apply to situations where copies of works are distributed through digital transmission

*29 This principle provision is limited to the distribution right of the copyright holder and does not affect copyright in any way. The "first sale doctrine" does not allow a copy of a work to be transmitted through a computer network. As mentioned above, it is based on existing network technology and computer technology.

Once the work is online, while the transmitter of the work retains the original copy of the work, the recipient

also obtains a copy or a new copy of the original copy, instead of The copy owned by the transmitter

When the owner of a copy transmits a copy

to another person without the permission of the copyright owner, the transmission may constitute an infringement of the copyright owner's copying. Therefore, the owner of the legal copy may distribute his copy through other means, but may not copy it without authorization or transmit it online without authorization

The reproduction rights and distribution rights in the digital environment and the "first sale theory" recognized by the author above all involve the mastery of the principle of "fair use" and "personal use" of digital works. Definition of Scope: "Fair use" of copyrighted works is a limitation of copyright law in most countries.

However, many countries have inconsistent regulations on the scope of "fair use". Since

we believe that unauthorized transmission of other people's copyrighted works online is an infringement, then, 1. The work is in

two Transmission on the network between private individuals, 2. Transmission of the work on the network between multiple individuals and one enterprise, 3. Transmission of the work only on the intranet of the enterprise, these transmission behaviors can be regarded as "personal

p>

Use"? According to Article 22, Item 1 of my country's Copyright Law, the use of other people's published works for personal study, research

or appreciation falls within the scope of fair use. However, downloading other people's copyrighted works transmitted online without authorization, or uploading other people's copyrighted works (for example, someone in China may upload his favorite copyrighted works and unpublished works by domestic friends). Can works sent to friends in the United States via the Internet be considered "fair use"? The owner of a French information coffee shop uploaded the banned book "The Big Secret" that exposed the private life of former President Mitterrand into the Internet without the consent of the author and publisher. France sparks controversy over copyright infringement and privacy rights*30. Article 22 of my country's Copyright Law stipulates restrictive provisions on the rights of copyright owners in 12 aspects. But these regulations hardly cover every situation of personal use in the digital environment, and it is difficult to enumerate them one by one in the law. The author believes that in addition to appropriately enriching and clarifying the provisions of Article 22 of the Copyright Law, the following three factors should be grasped when judging whether "fair use" is done in judicial practice: Basic principles*31: 1. Purpose and nature of use. Mainly consider

whether the use is for non-profit education purposes and whether it is commercial in nature; 2. The nature of the copyrighted work being used

. If a copyrighted work can bring huge economic benefits, such as a best-selling book or movie, then copying it will be subject to strict scrutiny; 3. The copyrighted work being used

quantity and quality of use. In addition to plagiarizing a large amount of other people's works which may constitute infringement, even copying a small part of the work (especially if the copied part is of high quality or is very detrimental to other parts of the work) Important) will also constitute infringement. In the case of Janus v. A & M Records

, the court held that if the entire work copied is essential (even if the two works as a whole are not complete) similar), can be regarded as infringement. *32 In this way, if a new music

work is created based on a small part of another person’s work (and digitized), and

the adopted part has considerable influence on other people’s work. value may constitute infringement.

3. Information adjustment highway and patent protection

Some multimedia works often include text search and retrieval software. Multimedia systems

and database systems are equipped with corresponding system management software. Since these software can easily be plagiarized and copied by others, how to provide legal protection for computer software has become an important topic in the construction of the information highway. my country's Computer Software Protection Regulations stipulate registration protection for computer software

. However, software copyright registration is not a necessary condition for software to obtain copyright.

It can usually only be used as a prerequisite for administrative processing or litigation of software rights disputes. *33 This shows that its

low protection effectiveness . my country's existing patent law, like the patent laws of most countries in the world, excludes simple computer software from its scope of protection. However, if the subject matter of an invention patent application contains computer software and produces technical effects, it constitutes a complete technical solution and makes a technical contribution to the existing technology. (For example, if a computer software is input into a well-known computer to control the internal operation of the computer, thereby improving the internal performance of the computer), the computer software cannot be used just because the computer software is used. Refusal to grant patent rights.

*34

The issue of legal protection of computer software has been confused by intellectual property academic and practical circles for many years. Whether to use copyright law for protection, patent law or trade secret law Protection,

All parties have always insisted on their own opinions. For software-related inventions, the United States prefers patent law protection.

The U.S. Federal Court of Expansion has recently ruled on several cases involving computer mathematical algorithm (Mathe-

matical algorithm) patents. *35 disagreed with the U.S. Patent Appeals Board’s rejection< /p>

The decision to grant a patent is that a memory with a data structure can be patented, because

the data structure must constitute the physical organization of the data. In response to the court's decision, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office drafted the "Guidelines for the Examination of Computer Implemented Inventions" in June 1995. In order to prevent counterfeiting of computer software, the Japan Intellectual Property Office recently changed the original patent

law's provision that computer software can only be patented if it is consistent with the device and other hardware, and decided

that CD- ROM software, etc. are subject to a patent system. *36

Although the current copyright law and patent law have their own advantages and disadvantages in protecting software, in practice,

because patents have exclusive characteristics, their scope of protection is clearly defined by the claims. Framing, compared to copyright protection, it is easy to obtain evidence of infringement, so patent protection for software should be given priority.

The author believes that pure computer software deduction methods or mathematical algorithms themselves, as part of the rules of intellectual activity

cannot be protected by my country's patent law, but for software organically integrated with hardware

How to protect related software-related inventions should be stipulated in the examination guidelines of the China Patent Office.

In particular, the substantive conditions for authorization (such as how to judge the validity of such inventions) should be clarified. Novelty

and creativity).

The birth of the information highway has accelerated the dissemination and exchange of information. Therefore, in patent examination

and invalidation litigation, more and more information will affect the patent examination. Members and judges judge novelty and creativity. Nowadays, information in patent specifications or printed publications is often found through manual or machine inspection. However, most of the original documents retrieved through these methods are paper-based original documents disseminated through traditional publishing channels. The emergence of electronic publications has changed the traditional information dissemination and retrieval methods, and increased the number of public information sources for judging the novelty and creativity of patent applications.

However, although these new electronic documents have the characteristics of multiple retrieval methods and fast speed,

due to the loss of information during network transmission, or the unauthorized access of network users to the network

The electronic documents on the website are tampered with, deleted, and the integrity of the information is destroyed, so that they cannot be printed out as they are

. Therefore, no physical evidence can be obtained regarding the date when the electronic information was first disclosed.

According to the provisions of Article 22, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of my country's Patent Law, when judging whether a patent application has novelty, it mainly depends on the number of patent applications before the filing date. There are no documents with the same content that have been published domestically or abroad, and there are no identical inventions that have been publicly used at home or abroad or otherwise known to the public. The level of inventive step is determined by comparing it with the existing technology before the filing date

. So, are electronic publications transmitted online considered "public"? Under what conditions does it constitute "publication disclosure" in the sense of patent law? Since the distribution volume or the degree of public use of electronic documents cannot be measured at present, and in cases where the scope of use is limited (for example, such documents are on a personal network or an intranet dissemination and use) and generally cannot be used as an information source for judging existing technologies. So these problems are difficult to solve. Moreover, in order for a certain document to constitute a valid prior art document, its technical content must be accurate and reliable.

However, for the same reason as above, the content and accuracy of electronic documents are unpredictable, and the exact publication date of the document is difficult to determine, making it difficult to withstand any form of peer review or content. review.

This will complicate the evaluation of the information contained in electronic publications, which in turn affects

the judgment of novelty and inventiveness. *37 However, from a long-term perspective, electronic publications will surely become an important source of documentation for judging existing technologies in the near future. Therefore, we should

as early as possible now Study how certain criteria can be developed to determine the date of first disclosure and content of electronic publications and

their scope of use and dissemination.

4. Information Highway and Trademark Rights Protection and Anti-Unfair Competition

my country implements a registration system for trademarks. Once a trademark is approved for registration, it will be subject to the provisions of the Trademark Law

Protect. Trademark rights are limited to approved registered trademarks and approved products. In accordance with the provisions of Article 38, Item 1 of my country's Trademark Law, others may use or approve the same goods or similar goods without the permission of the trademark owner. Trademarks that are identical or similar to a registered trademark will constitute infringement.

Article 11 of my country’s Trademark Law also stipulates: “When applying for trademark registration, the product category and product name used shall be filled in according to the prescribed commodity classification table.” This shows that the applicant

When submitting an application for trademark registration, the product category and product name to be used for the registered trademark must be accurately and clearly filled in according to the product classification table

. This not only indicates that the applicant

wants to obtain trademark rights for which categories of goods, and makes it clear