隨著雲端服務的興起，使得網路著作權的爭議逐漸成為著作權保護的主戰場。美國在網際網路的雲端服務提供者面對使用者的侵害著作權行為議題上，由原先不使其承擔直接侵權的責任的政策態度，在2014年時美國聯邦最高法院的態度轉向，本文認為殊為不智。而美國對於間接侵權責任則傾向對於網際網路的服務提供者採取較小負擔的政策趨勢。本文建議臺灣在面對網際網路使用者的著作權侵害時，應該避免直接認定網際網路服務提供者與使用者為共同侵權行為人。同時對於網際網路服務提供者的適當間接責任要求，則必須採取較為謹慎的政策態度，而美國對於網際網路服務提供者著作權間接侵權的處理態度，或許值得臺灣的政策制定者借鏡。

Following through the rising of cloud computer services, the main battlefield for copyright protection dispute has been gradually shifting from the physical word to the cyberspace. The legal dispute in the United States of how the computing service provider would be responsible to the user's copyright infringement has been changed from secondary liability to direct liability in the 2014 Supreme Court decision. This article argues the 2014 Supreme Court decision is unwise. For possible secondary liability, the policy trend of United States is adopting lighter burden for the internet service provider. This article suggests that, in dealing with users' copyright infringement within internet, the authorities in Taiwan should avoid concluding users and their internet service providers are joint tortfeasors. At the same time, the authorities should take precautious measurement while imputing moderate secondary liability to the internet service provider. Perhaps the policy maker in Taiwan can gain some experience from the United States.