Abstract
Under the provisions of China's current copyright law, audiovisual works and video recordings as two separate objects with different degrees of protection. This article attempts to explain the ambiguity of the criteria for distinguishing the audiovisual works and video recordings in judicial practice and proposes the following solutions: when distinguishing audiovisual works and video recordings by the presence or absence of originality, serial images that faithfully record existing images should be excluded, and according to the dichotomy of image and content, the three links of visualization of process events, raw image shooting and editing production should be refined in the judgment criteria. Since it is difficult to make direct distinctions within audiovisual works, this paper converts them into distinctions of producers according to the different situations of claimants as an aid.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Social Science and Humanity
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
