独立日

最高法修改著作权民事纠纷司法解释，增强可操作性_我的网站

A |     A former Ohio State University student-athlete is speaking out against Rep. Jim Jordan's bid for House speaker, saying Jordan "turned a blind eye" to allegations of abuse against a team doctor during his time as assistant coach for the university's wrestling team.Rocky Ratliff is now an attorney who also represents several other former OSU wrestlers in an ongoing lawsuit against the university."I think the wrestlers that I represent, not one of us, would back him for such a leadership position," Ratliff told ABC News Live Prime anchor Linsey Davis.He continued, "He's abandoned us for his own selfish reasons when he could have helped us. He's chosen not to. So that is not the good makings of any type of leadership or any type of leader that he would have put up with at Ohio State. It's just not. None of us wrestlers believe he should get that position."A spokesperson for Jordan, R-Ohio, told ABC News, "Chairman Jordan never saw or heard of any abuse, and if he had, he would have dealt with it."The allegations of abuse were against Dr. Richard Strauss, an Ohio State team doctor and sports medicine researcher. Strauss is accused of sexually abusing at least 177 men over an 18-year period from 1979 to 1997 -- nearly his entire time at Ohio State, according to an independent report released in 2019.Investigators determined that university officials ignored nearly two decades of accusations of sexual abuse against Strauss, who killed himself in 2006 at age 67, seven years after retiring from the university.The accusations of abuse involved athletes from at least 16 sports including wrestling, hockey and swimming, and included Strauss' work at the student health center and an off-campus clinic that he founded late in his tenure, according to the report.The university removed Strauss as a school physician in 1996 after a flurry of student complaints and reported his actions to the State Medical Board of Ohio. However, the school allowed Strauss to retain his tenured faculty position while he operated an off-campus clinic, where the report says he continued to abuse students.Ohio State University has since admitted that it failed to protect students from Strauss, paying out $60 million in settlements to some 296 victims.Jordan, who was an assistant coach on the team from 1986 to 1994, came under fire in 2018 when several former OSU wrestlers took their allegations against Strauss to the media and claimed Jordan was aware of Strauss' inappropriate behavior and failed to report it. The university then announced it was opening an investigation into the allegations against Strauss.Jordan also denied knowing about the abuse when the allegations first came out in 2018.Jordan is now facing renewed scrutiny amid the ongoing battle for House speaker. After again failing to receive enough GOP support, the congressman and chair of the House Judiciary Committee was defeated a second time after a vote on Wednesday afternoon."We believe very strongly, especially all the wrestlers that were there at the time, that Jim Jordan knew what was going on," Ratliff said on Wednesday.Ratliff continued, "Jordan should come forward and tell the truth about what happened. At least meet with the guys. He's failed to do that -- to hear our side, he's failed. You know, even if you believe what Jim Jordan says, he has never once reached out to any wrestler to say, 'Hey, I missed it. I'm sorry. How are you feeling?'"ABC News' Eric Ortega, Imtiyaz Delawala, Lindsey Griswold, and Andrea Amiel contributed to this report.。    　　讯 8月20日，最高人民法院发布《关于修改〈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〉的决定》（法释〔2026〕18号，以下简称《决定》）。

B | 《决定》于2026年5月25日经最高人民法院审判委员会第1976次会议通过，自2026年9月1日起施行。　　《决定》坚持严格保护知识产权，坚持依法解释和问题导向，针对著作权司法实践中的作品发表认定、合理使用的边界、报刊转载法定许可的范围等重点难点问题，进一步细化和完善法律适用标准，统一案件裁判尺度，增强司法解释的可操作性，为当事人提供明确诉讼指引，为市场提供明确行为预期，确保著作权法的正确实施。　　一是进一步明确“公之于众”的认定标准。删去原司法解释第九条中“著作权人自行或者经著作权人许可”的限定，将“公之于众”明确为将作品向不特定的人公开，但不以公众知晓为构成要件。主要考虑是，目前知识产权理论界和司法实践均认可，作品因他人侵权行为而被公开也属于公之于众。　　二是进一步细化合理使用的适用规则。将原司法解释第十八条规定的“室外公共场所的艺术作品”修改为“公共场所的艺术作品”，与2020年修正的著作权法第二十四条第一款第十项的规定保持一致。同时，增加但书规定，明确对公共场所艺术作品的临摹、绘画、摄影、录像人，可以对其成果依法以合理的方式和范围再行使用，但是未经著作权人许可不得以相同方式设置、陈列或者公开传播。作出上述修改的主要考虑是，著作权法第二十四条第一款删除了“公开场所”的限定词“室外”，公开场所的范围扩大，涵盖了公共及商业性的美术馆、展览馆等，因此需要对“合理的使用方式和范围”进行限制，在保障合理使用空间的同时避免挫伤著作权人展览作品的积极性。　　三是进一步明确报刊转载法定许可的适用范围。将原司法解释第十七条“报纸、期刊”的范围明确为“报纸、期刊主管部门批准出版的纸质报纸、期刊以及与其内容和版面格式相一致的数字化版本”，以适应网络和数字技术发展需要。同时增加一款，明确报纸、期刊与互联网信息服务提供者之间相互转载、互联网信息服务提供者之间相互转载已发表的作品，不适用前款规定，应当经过著作权人许可并支付报酬。作出上述修改的主要考虑是，当前报纸、期刊行业在经营模式上已经从传统纸质媒体扩展到网络数字媒体，将报纸、期刊版面以原格式通过信息网络传播可以视为纸质转载方式的合理延伸，被诉侵权人可以援引著作权法第三十五条第二款规定的法定许可进行抗辩。除了上述情形以外，以其他形式将报纸、期刊内容通过信息网络传播的，不适用报刊转载法定许可。版权申明：凡注有“”或电头为“”的稿件，均为独家版权所有，未经许可不得转载或镜像；授权转载必须注明来源为“”，并保留“”的电头。    。

Current article:http://k82di.taokenlaichunlei.bond/news/20260826_998260.html

Published on:04:27:02