August 2017

Originality and creativity in the reporting of facts of a news report is protected under the Copyright Law(Taiwan)

2016.07.15
Ankwei Chen

The Intellectual Property Office issued the Email-1050715 Circular on July 15, 2016 (hereinafter, the "Circular") stating that originality and creativity in the reporting of facts of a news report is protected under the Copyright Law.

This Circular states that while a work that consists purely of a reporting of facts in a news report is not protectable, and anyone may use such work without violating the Copyright Law, if the news report also contains the opinion, analysis or other similar commentary by the author, or if the report consists of pictures and photographs, such report is protectable under the Copyright Law to the extent they are original and creative; use of such report will require the permission of the copyright holder unless the requirements of fair use are present.

This Circular further points out that since reposting of articles involves ÒreproductionÓ and Òpublic transmissionÓ, the fair use rules under Article 61 of the Copyright Act may not apply if the reposted article concerns health, medicine and healthcare instead of politics, economics or other current events, and permission or licensing from the author is required. In contrast, the sharing of news through Òcopying of URLsÓ so that another may simply click it to access such content do not in principle involve ÒreproductionÓ and Òpublic transmissionÓ, hence no infringement of copyright. However, if one knowingly provides to the public URLs to websites whose contents are infringing, it may constitute aiding and abetting infringement of the copyright holderÕs right of public transmission and thus result in joint and several liability. As for printing news content on advertisements, since ÒreproductionÓ and Òpublic transmissionÓ is present, permission or licensing from the author is required unless fair use applies. .

Regarding the use of citations under Article 52 of the Copyright Act, since reproduction of anotherÕs work is still present even if source is indicated, in principle the permission of the author is required. However, if content is extracted, summarized or reproduced for oneÕs own reporting, criticism, education, research or other appropriate purposes, reasonable use of such content through citations in accordance with Article 64 is permissible as long as such use is intended for that individualÕs own works; if fair use is not absent, citations would not save such reproduction from being considered infringing, and permission from the author is still recommended before such use.

In the end, since copyright is a private right, whether a use is fair or infringing in a dispute will still require a judicial authorityÕs determination based on the facts of the particular case.

本網站上所有資料內容(「內容」)均屬理慈國際科技法律事務所所有。本所保留所有權利,除非獲得本所事前許可外,均不得以任何形式或以任何方式重製、下載、散布、發行或移轉本網站上之內容。

所有內容僅供作參考且非為特定議題或具體個案之法律或專業建議。所有內容未必為最新法律及法規之發展,本所及其編輯群不保證內容之正確性,並明示聲明不須對任何人就信賴使用本網站上全部或部分之內容,而據此所為或經許可而為或略而未為之結果負擔任何及全部之責任。撰稿作者之觀點不代表本所之立場。如有任何建議或疑義,請與本所聯繫。

作者

Katty
Katty