Abstract:Copyrighted works are greatly entwined with the concept of the sharing economy because of their status as informational public goods. Unlike commercial sharing models that address tangible goods such as bikes and houses, the sharing of which is limited by their physical nature, sharing models for intangible copyrighted works such as Google Books and live game webcasting must account for the comparatively unfettered ability for these to be shared. Accordingly, these models are more focused on exploiting such works to their full commercial potential. However, these sharing models are to a large extent based on the unauthorised exploitation of copyrighted works and will be unworkable if the related copyright issues cannot be solved. The interest that copyright owners have in exclusivity must thus be balanced with the public's interest in further exploitation of copyrighted works. Article 22 of the Copyright Law of China outlines an exhaustive list of copyright exceptions; such a restrictive list is incompatible with the sharing economy. The Chinese courts have realised this problem and have gone beyond the law in their judgments, taking a cue from their US counterparts. However, many of these decisions appear to be inconsistent with one another. To address the aforementioned problems, this paper examines the latest proposed amendment to the Copyright Law of China and proposes several legislative and judicial actions that could help promote the sharing economy. At the legislative level, enacting legislation based on a refined open-ended fair use model is necessary to promote the development of the sharing economy. At the judicial level, Chinese courts should employ the concept of transformative use to correctly interpret legislation based on the proposed open-ended model. With transformative use as the cornerstone of copyright policy, the public gains the freedom to share others’ works, participate in the innovation process, and create works with new value. Moreover, authors would retain an incentive to create works under such a legal regime because market substitution will not occur if a work is used for a different expressive purpose than that for which the work was originally created. Thus, a balance can be achieved between promoting the sharing economy and protecting the exclusivity of copyright in China.

Analysis on the Abuse of P2P Share Software and Its Regulation

Analysis of Pollution Disseminating Model of P2P Network

Present Status and Future Development of P2P Technology

Reasonable Use and Management of the Copyright in Digital Library

The Law Applicable to P2P Networks on National and International Bases for Violating Intellectual Property Rights

Reseach on Intellectual Property Management Model Based on P2P File Sharing Service

Trend of Copyright Legislation in Cyberspace

Implementing digital right management in P2P content sharing system

Retrospect and Prospect of Copyright Protection for Computer Software in China

Legal Regulation of Abuse of Copyright Exclusive License by Digital Music Platforms

On the Criminal Responsibly of End-User Software Piracy

A Study on Key Strategies in P2P File Sharing Systems and ISPs' P2P Traffic Management.

Research on the Balance between Communication Sharing and Copyrights Protection Boundry

Internet Software Piracy in China: A User Analysis of Resistance to Global Software Copyright Enforcement

On the Impact of Information Network Dissemination Right on Library Information Resource Sharing

To Share is Fair: the Changing Face of China's Fair Use Doctrine in the Sharing Economy and Beyond.

PIFF: An Intelligent File Filtering Mechanism for Peer-to-Peer Network

On the Application of the Principle of Exhaustion of Distribution Rights in the Network Environment:A Review of European and American Adjudication Positions and China's Approach

A Review on the Abuse of Intellectual Property Right

The discussion of the relationship between intellectual property protection and the sharing of information resources and the construction of balancing mechanism

General Theory on Antimonopoly Restriction of Refusal to Deal of IP