视听作品著作权的诉讼主体——以深圳声影公司系列案为视角

发布时间：2018-02-13 06:24

本文关键词： 诉讼主体作品著作权被许可人著作权集体管理专有使用权民事诉讼法诉讼地位提起诉讼诉权理论权利人 　出处：《人民司法(应用)》2016年07期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：我国在著作权司法保护中坚持有利于著作权权利人维权的司法理念,从有利于制止侵权角度出发,对知识产权许可合同中被许可人的诉讼地位,一般通过实质判断来确定其诉讼主体资格。由于视听作品著作权主体多元性、权利层叠性和利益分散性的特点,导致司法实务中诉讼主体确定较为混乱,特别是著作权许可产生的诉讼主体不规范更加剧了问题的复杂性。本文结合实际案例,认为应从著作权许可使用权的性质、诉权理论、著作权集体管理、诉讼信托等方面加以全面论证,才可从法理和法律规范中找到解决问题的路径,而非仅限于从现行著作权集体管理组织采取的所谓垄断型模式加以分析。著作权作为一项民事权利,权利人在依法提起诉讼时,仍应遵循民事诉讼法的规定,只有这样才能规范此类诉讼主体,统一司法裁判尺度。
[Abstract]:In the judicial protection of copyright, our country insists on the judicial idea in favor of the rights of copyright holders, and from the point of view of preventing the infringement of copyright, puts forward the litigation status of the licensee in the license contract of intellectual property right. Generally, the qualification of litigant subject is determined by substantive judgment. Due to the diversity of copyright subject of audio-visual works, the overlapping of rights and the dispersion of interests, the determination of litigation subject in judicial practice is more confused. In particular, the non-standardization of the subject of litigation arising from copyright licensing has exacerbated the complexity of the problem. This paper, in combination with practical cases, holds that the nature of the right to use copyright licensing, the theory of litigation, and the collective management of copyright should be taken into account. Only when the litigation trust and other aspects are fully demonstrated, can the path to solve the problem be found from the legal principles and legal norms. The copyright, as a civil right, should still follow the provisions of the Civil procedure Law when the obligee brings a lawsuit in accordance with the law, but not only from the so-called monopolistic mode adopted by the collective management organization of copyright, but also from the so-called monopolistic mode adopted by the copyright collective management organization. Only in this way can the subject of this kind of litigation be standardized and the criterion of judicial adjudication be unified.
【作者单位】：江苏省南京市中级人民法院;
【分类号】：D923.41

【相似文献】