人格表征要素商品化的法律实证研究

发布时间：2018-05-07 00:43

本文选题：人格表征要素 + 商品化　；参考：《浙江大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：人格表征要素商品化的实质是利用特定人格者的魅力、特殊社会影响力进行促销活动,这是社会事实,在中国民法体系下,难以被权利化,也无权利化之必要。随着传媒技术的巨大进步,特别是互联网的普及,使人格表征要素的使用呈现出频繁、随意、多样化的特点。人格表征要素的商业化利用无所不在,形式各异,并且不断演绎出新的利用模式。对人格表征要素商品化的保护与规制发轫于英美法系,这与英美法系国家发达的市场经济、创新的营销模式、灵活的法律形式以及领先的知识产权法律制度息息相关。以德国为代表的大陆法系国家虽然在该问题上偏向保守,但仍然积极探索着以一般人格权制度进行概括性保护的路径.凡是经济利益存在之处,必然有利益冲突,因此需要法律规制。本文作者运用了案例实证研究方法,总结归纳了现行法下有关人格表征要素商品化的部分争议焦点,并对所涉案件的法院观点做初步点评。笔者归纳的争议点有：第一,人格表征要素商品化的客体范围；第二,集体肖像问题；第三,角色肖像问题；第四,人格表征要素商品化与名誉权的关系。笔者认为,肖像权、姓名和名称权、隐私权等具体人格权与自然人形象利益的含混不清是导致上述问题的根本原因。接下来,本文对人格表征要素相关理论问题进行了介绍和分析,区分了人格、人格要素与人格表征要素等三个概念,厘清了人格的商业利用的对象。以人格上利益的区分入手,本文讨论了人格表征要素上尊严性利益和财产性利益之间的关系和相互的影响。本文探讨和评判了人格表征要素商品化的正当性基础,为下文论及保护模式提供了前提。诉诸法哲学的正当化路径是一种诉诸直觉和情感的路径,抽象并且缺乏严谨的论证。经济学基础以功利主义为价值取向,以效率理论和激励理论为核心,对人格表征要素商品化提供法律保护有助于减小交易成本,激励人们创造更多的形象价值。经济学基础的缺陷是注重外部规则的刺激作用而忽略了人自身的局限性。本文参考比较法内容,认为人格表征要素商品化现象的保护模式有如下几种：以一般侵权行为法提供保护的英国法模式、以德国为代表的人格权法的保护模式和以美国法为代表的财产权法的保护模式。我国法律提供了不完善的侵权行为法和人格权法的保护,这种保护有待参照德国法上的保护方式进行完善。本文以重叠表征要素商品化利益的保护为例,讨论了集体形象和跨界形象上的利益分配问题。对集体肖像、跨界形象所体现的人格经济利益的保护应当抓住形象的广告促销能力这一核心,而非拘泥于表现形式而进行机械的利益分配。集体肖像是个错误的概念,集体肖像权的商品化利益实际是自然人集合形象上经济利益。演员对其所饰演的角色,若符合特定的条件,应当享有商品化利益,这种商品化利益不能为表演者权所覆盖。角色原型也可能分享商品化利益。最后,无限制就无自由,人格表征要素商品化要获得蓬勃发展,实现个人利益与社会利益的共赢,需要厘清人格表征要素商品化与其他权益间的冲突；知识产权中的限制规则可以为人格表征要素商品化的规制提供有益的借鉴。本文归纳的人格表征要素商品化利益与其他权益之间的冲突主要有：在公共领域内的权益冲突、在人格权上的权益冲突、与知识产权为代表的财产权的冲突以及与市场规制之间的冲突。结合知识产权上的限制规则,讨论了规制的价值阶位、原则和具体路径。具体的限制规则有：使用领域的限制、时间限制、权利穷竭制度、合理使用的限制以及对轻微损害须合理容忍之义务的限制。
[Abstract]:The essence of the commercialization of personality characterization elements is to make use of the charm of specific personalities and special social influence to carry out promotion activities. This is social fact. Under the civil law system of China, it is difficult to be right and is not necessary to benefit. With the great progress of the media technology, especially the popularity of the Internet, the use of personality characterization elements is presented. The characteristics of frequent, arbitrary and diversified. The commercialization of personality characterization elements is omnipresent, different forms, and constantly deduces the new mode of utilization. The protection and regulation of the commercialization of personality characterization elements originate in the Anglo American legal system, which is with the developed market economy, innovative marketing mode and flexible legal form in the Anglo American legal system countries. The legal system of intellectual property rights is closely related to the leading legal system of intellectual property. Although the civil law countries represented by Germany are conservative on this issue, they still actively explore the path of general protection by the general personality right system.
In this paper, the author uses a case study method, summarizes the focus of the controversy on the commercialization of personality characterization elements under current law, and makes a preliminary comment on the court's views on the cases involved. The author's controversial points are: first, the object scope of the commercialization of personality characterization elements; second, the problem of collective portrait; third, angle. Fourth, the relationship between the commercialization of personality characterization elements and the right of reputation. The author holds that the ambiguity of the right of portrait, the right of name and name, and the right of privacy, and the interests of the image of the natural person, are the fundamental reasons for the above problems.
Then, this paper introduces and analyzes the related theoretical problems of personality characterization, distinguishes three concepts, such as personality, personality factor and personality characterization element, clarifies the object of commercial use of personality. This paper, starting with the distinction between personal interests, discusses the relationship between the dignity and property interests of the personality traits. Relationship and mutual influence. This paper discusses and judges the justification basis for the commercialization of personality characterization elements, which provides the premise for the following discussion on the protection mode. The justification path of the philosophy of recourse is a path to appeal to intuition and emotion, abstract and lack of rigorous argument. The economic basis is based on utilitarianism as the value orientation, and is effective. The core of rate theory and incentive theory is to provide legal protection for the commercialization of personality characterization elements, which can help to reduce transaction costs and encourage people to create more image values. The defect of the economic basis is to pay attention to the stimulus of external rules and ignore the limitations of people themselves.
This article, referring to the content of the comparative law, holds that the protection patterns of the commercialization of personality characterization elements are as follows: the British law mode that provides protection by the general tort law, the protection mode of the personality right law represented by Germany and the protection mode of the property rights law represented by the American law. The protection of behavior law and personality right law should be perfected with reference to the protection method in German law.
This paper, taking the protection of the commercialized interest of overlapping characterization elements as an example, discusses the problem of the distribution of interests in the collective image and the cross boundary image. The protection of the personality economic interests embodied in the collective portrait and the cross boundary image should seize the core of the advertising promotion ability of the image, instead of carrying out the distribution of mechanical interests in the form of expression. The portraits of the body are a wrong concept. The commercialized interest of the collective portrait right is actually the economic benefit of the collective image of the natural person. The actor's role played by the actor should enjoy the commercialized interests if it meets the specific conditions. The commercialized interest can not be covered by the performers' rights. The role prototype may also share the commercialized interests.
Finally, there is no freedom without restriction. The commercialization of personality characterization elements should be flourishing, and the win-win of personal and social interests should be achieved. It is necessary to clarify the conflict between the commercialization of personality characterization elements and other rights and interests; the restriction rules in intellectual property can provide useful reference for the regulation of the commercialization of personality characterization elements. The conflicts between the commercial interests of personality characterization and other rights and interests include the conflict of rights and interests in the public domain, the conflict of rights and interests in the personality right, the conflict with the property rights represented by the intellectual property rights and the conflict with the market regulation. Specific restrictions include restrictions on the use of the field, time limit, the exhaustion of rights, the limitation of rational use, and the restrictions on the obligation to be tolerated for slight damage.

【学位授予单位】：浙江大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D913

【参考文献】