论提供规避技术措施手段的法律性质

发布时间：2018-07-10 15:59

本文选题：技术措施 + 间接侵权　；参考：《法学》2014年10期

【摘要】：为了实施《世界知识产权组织版权条约》中有关保护技术措施的规定,我国及许多国家的版权立法均禁止提供用于规避技术措施的工具、设备或服务。然而,对于提供规避技术措施手段的法律性质却存在极大争议。一种代表性的观点是,提供规避手段的行为构成间接侵权,这一观点不能成立。首先,对间接侵权的认定应遵循"实质性非侵权用途"规则,而规避手段都具有"实质性非侵权用途",多数提供规避手段的行为将因此不构成间接侵权,从而导致禁止该行为的条款形同虚设。其次,多数国家禁止提供规避手段均不以使用规避手段规避技术措施的行为构成侵权为前提,同时认定提供行为违法的"设计目的标准"、"商业价值标准"和"推销目的标准"均非认定间接侵权的标准。最后,提供用于规避"接触控制措施"的手段也受禁止,但未经许可"接触"作品不构成版权侵权,"接触控制措施"也并非用于防止版权侵权。这说明提供规避"接触控制措施"的手段并不是间接侵权。其实,提供规避手段的行为是一种违反版权法特殊规定的违法行为,其受禁止的理由在于其干扰了版权人利用技术措施对其合法利益进行的自力保护,本身具有可责难性。
[Abstract]:In order to implement the provisions of the copyright Treaty of the World intellectual property Organization (WIPO), the copyright legislation of our country and many countries prohibit the provision of tools, equipment or services for circumventing technical measures. However, there is great controversy about the legal nature of the means of circumventing technical measures. One representative view is that the provision of circumvention constitutes an indirect infringement. First of all, the identification of indirect infringement should follow the "substantive non-tort use" rule, and the means of circumvention have "substantive non-tort uses", most of the acts providing means of circumvention will not constitute indirect infringement. As a result, the provisions prohibiting the act are void. Secondly, most countries do not prohibit the provision of circumvention means on the premise that the use of circumvention means to circumvent technical measures constitutes tort. At the same time, "design purpose standard", "commercial value standard" and "marketing purpose standard" are not the standards of indirect infringement. Finally, the provision of means to circumvent "contact control measures" is also prohibited, but unauthorized "access" does not constitute copyright infringement, nor is "contact control measures" used to prevent copyright infringement. This suggests that providing a means of circumventing contact control measures is not an indirect infringement. In fact, the act of providing a means of circumvention is an illegal act that violates the special provisions of copyright law. The reason for its prohibition lies in its interference with the copyright owner's ability to protect his legitimate interests by means of technical measures, which is itself reprehensible.
【作者单位】：华东政法大学;
【基金】：教育部新世纪优秀人才支持计划课题《技术措施的保护与规制》的成果
【分类号】：D997.1;D923.41;D924.3

【参考文献】