字库软件中字形的著作权客体性研究

发布时间：2018-03-10 08:34

本文选题：字形　切入点：思想/表达二分法　出处：《深圳大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：近年来,字库软件在我国的适用范围越来越广泛,字库软件中字形是不是著作权客体的问题也出现在司法实践中,学术界对这个问题进行了深入的研究,提出了不同的观点和相应的理由。序言中引用了三个代表性学术观点,并且提出字形的著作权客体性认定应该以著作权客体的法律规定为依据。第一章首先对字形、字体和字库软件这三个概念进行界定,指出三者之间的区别和联系,为后文的分析奠定基础。然后介绍了司法实践中两个判决结论相左的案件,跃兴旺案认定字形是著作权法保护的客体,宝洁案认定字形不是著作权法保护的客体,进而提出问题,按照著作权客体的法律规定,字形是不是著作权法保护的客体。第二章首先对表达的指代和思想的范畴进行了认定,对思想/表达二分法进行了分析。然后按照确认的法理对方正平和体“然”的字形进行分析,进而得出结论,字形的表达是字形的整体形状,字形的思想是字形对应的汉字。最后按照该结论对宝洁案进行分析,方正倩体“飘”“柔”字形的表达是“飘”“柔”的整体形状,思想是汉字“飘”“柔”。第三章首先对合并原则和场景原则进行了分析,总结出适用两种原则的一般情形。然后按照一般情形对方正平和体“自”的字形进行分析,进而得出结论,字形的表达可能会因为过于简单,从而和笔画出现合并。最后利用该结论对宝洁案进行分析,方正倩体“飘”“柔”的字形足够复杂,不会与笔画合并,该字形不适用合并原则或者场景原则。第四章首先提出作品是否具有独创性取决于作品是否是独立完成的以及是否具有最低限度的创造性。对于字形是否是独立完成的这个问题,只要原告不能提供证据证明在后字形和某一公开发行的在先字形构成实质性相似,就可以认定在后字形是独立完成的。认定字形是否具有最低限度的创造性需要考察字形是否体现了普通人可以识别的作者个性。字形的创作空间受到创作要求、创作工具、创作方式的限制,只有在字稿制作环节和修字环节,字形才具有创作空间。对这两个环节中的特定字形进行分析可以得出认定字形是否具有最低限度的创造性的方法——考察在字稿制作环节,遵循特定的创作要求、使用特定的创作工具、按照特定的创作方式创作出的字形是否体现了作者个性。最后,按照认定字形独创性的方法对宝洁案进行分析,方正倩体“飘”“柔”的字形具有独创性,是著作权法保护的客体。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the scope of application of font software in our country is more and more extensive, the problem of whether the font is the object of copyright in the library software also appears in the judicial practice, the academic circles have carried on the thorough research to this question. Different viewpoints and corresponding reasons are put forward. Three representative academic viewpoints are cited in the preface, and it is proposed that the recognition of copyright object should be based on the legal provisions of copyright object. This paper defines the three concepts of font and font software, points out the differences and connections between the three concepts, and lays the foundation for the later analysis. The Yueheng case recognizes that the glyph is the object protected by copyright law, while the Procter & Gamble case recognizes that the glyph is not the object protected by copyright law, and then raises the question, in accordance with the legal provisions of the copyright object. Is the glyph an object protected by copyright law. Chapter two first identifies the categories of expressions and ideas. The dichotomy of thought / expression is analyzed. Then according to the confirmed legal principle of the other side and the shape of the body "ran", it is concluded that the expression of the glyph is the whole shape of the glyph. The thought of glyph is a Chinese character corresponding to glyph. Finally, according to the analysis of the Procter and Gamble case, Fang Zhengqian's expression of "gone with the wind" and "soft" is the integral shape of "gone with the wind" and "soft". The thought is "gone with the wind" and "soft". Chapter three analyzes the principle of merging and the principle of scene, and sums up the general situation that applies to the two principles. Then, according to the general situation, the characters of the opposite party and the body "self" are analyzed. And then came to the conclusion that the expression of the glyph might be combined with the stroke because it was too simple. Finally, the conclusion was used to analyze the Procter and Gamble case. The font shape of Fang Zhengqian "floating" and "soft" was complex enough not to be merged with the stroke. This font does not apply to the combination principle or the scene principle. Chapter 4th first states that the originality of the work depends on whether the work is completed independently and with minimal creativity. Completed this problem, As long as the plaintiff fails to provide evidence that the post-glyph constitutes a material similarity to the pre-glyph of a public offering, To determine whether the glyph has the minimum creative needs to investigate whether the glyph reflects the author's personality that ordinary people can recognize. The creation space of the glyph is required by the creation, and the creative tools. The limitation of the way of creation is only in the link of script making and the link of correcting Chinese characters. Only by analyzing the specific glyph in these two links can we conclude that there is a minimum creative method to determine whether the glyph has a minimum of creativity. Using a specific creative tool, whether the glyph created according to a specific creative method reflects the author's personality. Finally, according to the analysis of Procter & Gamble's case in accordance with the method of recognizing the originality of the glyph, Fang Zhengqian's glyph of "gone with the wind" and "soft" has its originality. It is the object protected by copyright law.
【学位授予单位】：深圳大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.41

【相似文献】