[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, when the right of information network dissemination is infringed, the focus of evidence collection lies in two aspects: fixing the infringement facts and establishing the ownership of the rights. Regarding the infringement facts, electronic data can be fixed through notarization, trusted timestamps, blockchain evidence storage, or qualified third-party platforms, preserving information such as the URL of the infringing webpage, page content, publication time, browsing volume, and the publisher. Since webpage content may be deleted or modified, evidence collection should be timely and use methods that can prove the fixed time point and the integrity of the content. Regarding the ownership of the rights, the creative drafts, source files, first publication records, signature information, registration certificates, and contracts and correspondence records related to creation and publication should be preserved. In addition, sending infringement notifications to the platform and requiring deletion while keeping records of the notifications and responses can be used as evidence to assert the platform's liability and calculate losses. It should be noted that the evidence collection methods must be legal, and evidence cannot be obtained through illegal means such as intrusion or destruction. If there are disputes over the electronic data, parties can apply for appraisal or request the court to retrieve the relevant data. The more complete the evidence is, the more conducive it will be to subsequent negotiations, complaints, or litigation to assert rights.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

The infringement of the right to disseminate information online often occurs in the online environment, where evidence is easily lost, making evidence collection particularly crucial. There are three typical scenarios: first, the work is unauthorizedly reposted by websites or self-media platforms; second, the work is uploaded to video or document sharing platforms; third, the infringing content is difficult to reproduce after being deleted from the original platform. When Beijing area courts handle such cases, they will review the authenticity, integrity, and time of collection of electronic data, so the standardization and timeliness of evidence collection directly affect the outcome of the case. Understanding the common methods and key points of evidence collection can help right holders effectively fix evidence and assert their rights after the infringement occurs.

II. Key points of contention

First, how to prove the authenticity of electronic data. Second, the effectiveness of notarization, time stamps, and blockchain evidence storage. Third, how to prepare evidence of ownership rights. Fourth, the role of notifying to delete records. Fifth, the legal requirements for evidence collection. The core is to review evidence collection within the framework of electronic data evidence rules, taking into account timeliness, completeness, and legality, and simultaneously fixing evidence of ownership rights.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

From a practical perspective, to obtain evidence of infringement of the right to disseminate information on the Internet, it is necessary to address two issues simultaneously: the facts of infringement and the ownership of rights. Regarding the facts of infringement, electronic data is easily subject to modification, so evidence collection should be timely and focus on ensuring its integrity. Notarized evidence collection has strong probative force and can fix the time point of evidence collection and the content of the page. Trusted time stamps and blockchain evidence collection are less costly and more efficient, but their effectiveness needs to be judged comprehensively based on whether the evidence collection process is standardized and whether the platform is reliable. Regardless of the method used, the URL, content, publication time, viewing volume, account subject, and page snapshot of the infringing webpage should be fully recorded. If necessary, multiple pieces of evidence should be collected for the same content to reflect its continuous state. Regarding the ownership of rights, the creator's drafts, source files, first publication records, authorship information, work registration certificates, and contracts related to the creation and publication should be preserved to prove the identity of the rights holder with the work. In addition, sending a notice of infringement to the platform and requesting its removal, and keeping the notice and processing records, can not only help stop infringement in time but also serve as important materials for claiming the liability of online service providers and calculating damages. It should be emphasized that the evidence collection methods must be legal and evidence cannot be obtained by invading others' systems or damaging data. If there are disputes about the authenticity of electronic data, a judicial appraisal or a request for court investigation and verification can be applied for. The more comprehensive and standardized the evidence is, the more conducive it will be to the realization of rights claims.

IV. Practical Suggestions and Legal Basis

Action suggestions: First, collect evidence promptly after discovering infringement to avoid the webpage being deleted or modified; Second, prioritize using trusted methods such as notarization, time stamps, or blockchain to fix electronic data; Third, comprehensively record the infringing website, content, publication time, and viewing volume; Fourth, simultaneously save the creative drafts, source files, publication records, and registration certificates; Fifth, send a notice to the platform and keep the processing records. For issues involving intellectual property protection and corporate legal affairs, you can refer to the relevant guidelines.Intellectual property and corporate consultantsFor issues related to evidence and procedures, you may refer to the following materials for reference:Comprehensive legal servicesLegal basis: The Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2020 and implemented on June 1, 2021) and the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024) regarding the provisions on electronic data evidence. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, online evidence is easily lost and should be fixed in time. Secondly, notarization, time stamps, and blockchain storage are common methods. Thirdly, evidence collection should fully record the website, content, and time. Fourthly, evidence of ownership rights should not be overlooked. For intellectual property protection, you can use the following methods:Intellectual property and corporate consultantsService acquisition involves the integration of evidence and proceduresIntegrated legal servicesFor matters related to the enforcement of compensation, you may refer to the following for reference.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcement casesColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: How to collect evidence when the right to disseminate information on the Internet is infringed?

The infringing webpages can be fixed by notarization, trusted time stamps, or blockchain storage, which fully records the URL, content, release time, and viewing volume, and simultaneously saves the ownership evidence.

Q2: Can screenshots be used as evidence?

Yes, but the evidentiary value is relatively limited. Screenshots are difficult to prove the time and completeness of the evidence, so it is recommended to combine notarization or trusted evidence storage methods to enhance the evidentiary value.

Q3: What needs to be proven?

On the one hand, it is necessary to prove the facts of infringement, including the unauthorized provision of works and page information; on the other hand, it is necessary to prove the ownership of rights, including evidence of creation and authorship.

Q4: What should I do if the infringing content has been deleted?

It is necessary to obtain evidence as soon as possible to deal with the risk of deletion; if it has already been deleted, you can try to contact the platform to retrieve the backend data, or apply to the court for an investigation and order the other party to provide relevant records.

Q5: What should I pay attention to when gathering evidence?

The method of obtaining evidence shall be legal, timely, and complete, and shall avoid intruding into or damaging others' systems. If there are any doubts about the authenticity of electronic data, a party may apply for an appraisal or request the court to verify it.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the adjudication opinions in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In the event of a dispute, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.