Abstract In the digital era, technical protection measures (TPMs) have become essential for safeguarding copyrighted content. However, their misuse has generated significant legal and normative tensions, particularly under China's Copyright Law. This paper critically examines key deficiencies in the current anti‐circumvention regime, including the absence of prohibitive provisions, the overextension of TPM protection, and the lack of corresponding obligations for rights holders. It also analyzes the judicial conflation of “direct circumvention” with the “provision of circumvention tools,” which has led to ambiguity in liability attribution and inconsistencies in case outcomes. Grounded in the principle of copyright interest balancing, this study combines doctrinal analysis with case‐based review to uncover structural and interpretive flaws in China's legal framework. It argues that circumvention behaviors should be reclassified not as copyright infringement but as violations of statutory prohibitions, and that evidentiary mechanisms should be optimized through burden‐shifting presumptions. Additionally, the paper calls for clarifying eligible parties authorized to deploy TPMs, introducing a legitimacy test for TPM purposes, and explicitly prohibiting abusive practices—such as restricting access to public domain works or bundling TPMs with unrelated products. By proposing a set of feasible legal reforms, this study aims to enhance the coherence, fairness, and enforceability of China's anti‐circumvention provisions, ultimately achieving a more balanced and rights‐sensitive digital copyright governance model.
Yan et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: