How Publishers Manage Digital Publishing Documents

In order to ensure that projects are carried out in strict accordance with the quality management system and related specifications, effective control and management must be implemented for documents and records (including development documents, management documents, training documents, decision documents, etc.) formed in the project.

Document management needs to be standardized.

At the beginning of management, all project document formats need to be unified and properties set.

Mainly include:

1. document numbering rule: item number - document classification number - date [headline].

2. state attributes are divided into three categories: draft, corrected and formal release.

3. the confidentiality of security level definition documents can be classified into public, internal use, confidential and so on according to their visibility.

4. general format: Cover + change notes + directory + text.

5. change note: in tabular form, when and when do people make changes to the document?

In addition, we need to control the version of the project documents, record the development and change of the stages in the implementation of the project, and ensure that the editors are compiled by different personnel.

Get consistent updates and maintenance.

Mainly include:

1. directory settings, for versioning of documents, can be implemented in hierarchical management, that is, the structure of "project name / implementation stage / document name".

Two

Setup is simple and easy to understand.

3. version number management. When creating documents, it is the 1 version. When it is necessary to adjust, update the version on this basis, sign the change person and change the time, and use the form to explain the version control information at the beginning of each document.

Finally, in

During the process, if there is a change outside the project plan, a written record of the change should be made and a detailed tracking record should be kept. When the change is completed, the result will be recorded as a reference document.

Related links:

Zhang Ping, a professor at Peking University law school, believes that the document sharing platform, as an irresistible business model, needs reasonable space for healthy development.

In order to solve the contradiction between the platform side and the obligee, it is often time-consuming and laborious to make changes in the legislation. The international trend is also to reduce the frequent changes in the legislation, and seek solutions in the actual implementation.

Therefore, the role of judicial practice is even more important. Judges should use discretion cautiously, do not impose excessive examination obligations on the platform side, and the rights holders should also actively protect their rights. After discovering that their works have been uploaded by infringement, they should exercise the right to delete the notice and minimize the outbreak of litigation war.

Zhang Ping further explained that the "red flag" principle is the exception of the "safe harbor" principle, that is, if the violation of the right of information network pmission is obvious, like a red flag flying, the Internet service provider can not pretend to be invisible or to shirk its responsibilities on the grounds that it does not know. If in such circumstances, if the link is not removed, even if the obligee has not issued a notice, we should also assume that the chain knows that the third party is infringing.

Zhang Ping believes that in sharing platform, this principle applies to some famous works, or hits with high popularity. It can not be considered that all works are applicable to the "red flag" principle.

Xu Chao, the former inspector of the State Copyright Bureau, thinks that the operation modes of different document sharing platforms are the same and different. The important condition for platform side to avoid legal risks is "not directly obtaining economic benefits because users upload infringing documents", which should become one of the important considerations in the platform's design and operation mode.

At the same time, when the infringement documents appear on the platform infringe upon the legitimate interests of the obligee, even if the platform side has no fault, it should actively fulfill the obligation to stop infringement.

Xu Chao also stressed that video sharing websites are relatively easy to distinguish whether the works uploaded by netizens are infringed. For example, the popular films being released are easier to be identified if they are uploaded by some personal users.

However, this "know" rule does not apply to documents, and set up another judgment standard for documents.

Jin Haijun, associate professor of Law School of Renmin University of China, pointed out that there are still many ambiguities and ambiguities in the existing legal provisions for judging whether the platform party should know the existence of torts. Besides the need for proper discussion in legislation, the court's decision is also very important.

The court's decision should not only solve the case, but also be forward-looking.

Specifically, in the case of Chinese and English Baidu libraries, the court held that the platform side should have the obligation to "know" for larger browsing works, and should take pre audit measures. This view deserves further study.