毕某等诉陈某等小说侵权案评析

发布时间：2019-01-04 21:13

【摘要】：影视业蓬勃发展使得各种改编行为日益增加,也为原作者权利保护带来了新的挑战。毕某、A出版社诉陈某、B出版社侵害著作权及不正当竞争纠纷一案便是如此。各方当事人围绕改编权侵害的认定、不正当竞争的判断以及赔偿数额的合理性进行激烈的争论。结合著作权法和侵权责任法等规定和相关理论,对争议焦点可以作如下分析:首先,原告对被告是否构成改编权侵害问题。陈某仅具有把小说改编成电视剧剧本以及出版电视剧剧本的授权,不具有出版电视剧剧本小说的授权,原告侵害了被告著作权中的改编权。其次,原告是否构成对被告的不正当竞争问题。原告和被告同在一个文化市场中活动,各主体均通过各自的行为来分享文化市场中产生的经济利益,各方之间存在着竞争关系,被告图书在未得到原告授权的情况下使用与原告知名小说相同的名称,造成图书市场中消费者的混淆,且对原告图书市场造成挤压,使原告遭受重大损失,构成对原告的不正当竞争。最后,被告赔偿数额的合理性问题。结合著作权损害赔偿以及不正当竞争相关原理,原告在明知未经原著作权人授权的情况下,出版和销售侵权小说,销售范围广、时间长、数量大。所以,在综合考虑社会危害性的大小、加害人的过错程度的轻重、侵权的持续时间、侵权范围等要素的情况下,原审法院判决的5万元赔偿额过低,二审法院予以纠正,判决赔偿权利人14万元的经济损失是合理的。
[Abstract]:The vigorous development of film and television industry makes various adaptation actions increase day by day, and also brings new challenges to the protection of the rights of original authors. Bimou, A Publishing House v. Chen, B Publishing House infringement of copyright and unfair competition dispute case is like this. The parties dispute over the determination of the infringement of adaptation right, the judgment of unfair competition and the rationality of the compensation amount. Combined with copyright Law and Tort liability Law and other relevant theories, the focus of the dispute can be analyzed as follows: first, whether the plaintiff constitutes an infringement of the defendant's adaptation right. Chen only has the authority to adapt the novel to the TV drama script and to publish the TV play script, but not to publish the drama script novel. The plaintiff infringes on the adaptation right of the defendant's copyright. Second, whether the plaintiff constitutes unfair competition against the defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant operate in the same cultural market, each subject shares the economic benefits arising from the cultural market through their own actions, and there is a competitive relationship between the parties. The defendant book used the same name as the plaintiff's well-known novel without the authorization of the plaintiff, resulting in confusion among consumers in the book market, and squeezing the plaintiff's book market, causing the plaintiff to suffer heavy losses. Constitute unfair competition against the plaintiff. Finally, the question of the reasonableness of the defendant's compensation. Combined with the principles of copyright damages and unfair competition, the plaintiff published and sold the infringing novel without the authorization of the original copyright owner, the scope of sale is wide, the time is long and the quantity is large. Therefore, considering the magnitude of social harmfulness, the degree of fault of the perpetrators, the duration of the infringement, the scope of the infringement and other factors, the compensation of 50,000 yuan decided by the original trial court is too low, and the court of second instance will correct it. It is reasonable to compensate the obligee for the economic loss of 140000 yuan.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D920.5;D923.41

【参考文献】