急求法律英语的一段翻译，不要翻译工具的，非常非常感谢

Question

第三部分从前两部分内容中提炼出本案的争议焦点，并在第四部分围绕其摘开讨论：视频网站版权侵权损害赔偿责任认定；“通知与移除”免责条款的适用；损害赔偿数额的认定方式。其中，第一个问题在理论界主流观点一直存在分歧，过错说及无过错说均不乏支持者。后两个问题则是对近年法院针对视频网站版权侵权审判方式加以探讨。“通知与移除”免责条款是借鉴美国法律的结果，而在对通知的作用与意义、作为被告的视频网站主观心态的认定的理解上却存在误区，以致各地法院在适用条件上标准不一。至于赔偿数额的计算方法，由于此类案件的复杂性和特殊性，法院在审判中常用的和创造性采用的方法均值得研究。
第五部分是研究结论，通过对上述三个争议焦点的分析论证，笔者提出了自己的观点，对于视频网站版权侵权问题，首先必须适用过错责任原则解决损害赔偿责任。其次，对于“通知与移除”免责条款这一舶来品，要结合法律本义及具体案情在认定网站主观过错的基础上决定是否适用，尤其要厘清通知的性质。而鉴于视频网站版权侵权屡禁不止，赔偿数额采用补偿式的计算方式已无法独立解决这一问题。最后，笔者针对上述问题对立法及审判方式提出了自己的一些建议。

PS。请问权能一词应如何翻译

Answer 1

　　第三部分从前两部分内容中提炼出本案的争议焦点，并在第四部分围绕其摘开讨论：视频网站版权侵权损害赔偿责任认定；“通知与移除”免责条款的适用；损害赔偿数额的认定方式。其中，第一个问题在理论界主流观点一直存在分歧，过错说及无过错说均不乏支持者。后两个问题则是对近年法院针对视频网站版权侵权审判方式加以探讨。“通知与移除”免责条款是借鉴美国法律的结果，而在对通知的作用与意义、作为被告的视频网站主观心态的认定的理解上却存在误区，以致各地法院在适用条件上标准不一。至于赔偿数额的计算方法，由于此类案件的复杂性和特殊性，法院在审判中常用的和创造性采用的方法均值得研究。
　　第五部分是研究结论，通过对上述三个争议焦点的分析论证，笔者提出了自己的观点，对于视频网站版权侵权问题，首先必须适用过错责任原则解决损害赔偿责任。其次，对于“通知与移除”免责条款这一舶来品，要结合法律本义及具体案情在认定网站主观过错的基础上决定是否适用，尤其要厘清通知的性质。而鉴于视频网站版权侵权屡禁不止，赔偿数额采用补偿式的计算方式已无法独立解决这一问题。最后，笔者针对上述问题对立法及审判方式提出了自己的一些建议。
　　Before the third part of contents of the two parts to extract the focus of controversy in this case and in the fourth part of open discussion around its pick: Video website copyright infringement liability for damage found; "notice and remove the" exemption clauses apply; amount of damages identification methods. One of the first questions at the theoretical circles have been the mainstream opinion differences, fault and no-fault Say Say there is no lack of supporters of both. After two questions, it is the courts in recent years web for video copyright infringement trial mode to be explored. "Notice and remove the" exemption clause in the United States are drawing on the results of the law, while in the notification of the role and significance, as the defendant's subjective video web mentality on the understanding that there are errors all over the court at which the conditions on the application of standards 1. As for the method of calculating the amount of compensation, such cases because of the complexity and particularity, the court at trial and creative use of commonly used methods are worth studying.

　　The fifth part is the conclusion of the study, through focus on the above analysis of three controversial argument, the author put forward their opinion, the web video copyright infringement problem, we must first resolve the application of the principle of fault liability damages. Secondly, for "notice and remove the" exemption clause in the imports, in conjunction with the legal merits of the original meaning and the specific website at that subjective fault on the basis of deciding whether to apply, in particular, want to clarify the nature of the notice. In view of the video website of repeated copyright infringement, the amount of compensation using the method for calculating the compensation has been unable to independently solve this problem. Finally, the author of legislation to address these issues and the trial by way of some of the recommendations of its own.
　　权能:Empowerment

Answer 2

Before the third part of contents of the two parts to extract the focus of controversy in this case and in the fourth part of open discussion around its pick: Video website copyright infringement liability for damage found; "notice and remove the" exemption clauses apply; amount of damages identification methods. One of the first questions at the theoretical circles have been the mainstream opinion differences, fault and no-fault Say Say there is no lack of supporters of both. After two questions, it is the courts in recent years web for video copyright infringement trial mode to be explored. "Notice and remove the" exemption clause in the United States are drawing on the results of the law, while in the notification of the role and significance, as the defendant's subjective video web mentality on the understanding that there are errors all over the court at which the conditions on the application of standards 1. As for the method of calculating the amount of compensation, such cases because of the complexity and particularity, the court at trial and creative use of commonly used methods are worth studying.
The fifth part is the conclusion of the study, through focus on the above analysis of three controversial argument, the author put forward their opinion, the web video copyright infringement problem, we must first resolve the application of the principle of fault liability damages. Secondly, for "notice and remove the" exemption clause in the imports, in conjunction with the legal merits of the original meaning and the specific website at that subjective fault on the basis of deciding whether to apply, in particular, want to clarify the nature of the notice. In view of the video website of repeated copyright infringement, the amount of compensation using the method for calculating the compensation has been unable to independently solve this problem. Finally, the author of legislation to address these issues and the trial by way of some of the recommendations of its own.

Answer 3

Before the third part of the contents of the two parts to extract the focus of controversy in this case and in the fourth part of the discussion surrounding the opening of its pick: Video website copyright infringement damages that duty; "notice and remove the" exemption clause in the application; amount of damages means that the. One of the first questions in the theory of community differences exist has been the mainstream opinion, and not at fault, said fault, said there is no lack of supporters of both. After two questions, it is the web in recent years, the Court of copyright infringement against the video mode of trial to be explored. "Notice and remove the" exemption clause from the United States are the result of the law, and in the role and significance of the notice, as the defendant's subjective attitude of the web video that exists on the understanding of the errors around the court at which the conditions on the application of standards 1. As for the method of calculating the amount of compensation, such cases because of the complexity and particularity, the court at trial and creative use of commonly used methods are worth studying.
The fifth part is the conclusion of the study, through focus on the above analysis of three controversial argument, I put forward their opinion, the web video copyright infringement problem, we must first address the application of the principle of fault liability damages. Secondly, the "notice and remove the" exemption clause in the imports, in line with the law and the specific merits of the original meaning of that website at the basis of subjective fault on the application to decide whether, in particular, to clarify the nature of the notice. In view of repeated copyright infringement Videos website, the amount of compensation used in the calculation of compensation has been unable to independently solve this problem. Finally, the author of legislation to address these issues and the trial by way of some of the recommendations of its own.
ps 聚苯乙烯