试论建筑作品的独创性

发布时间：2018-07-28 20:25

【摘要】：随着社会的向前发展，知识产权法律也得到逐步的完善，越来越多的作品形式都被纳入了著作权法保护的范围。建筑作品作为一种特殊的作品，其和其他形式的作品一样，蕴含了设计师大量的智力劳动，是设计师创造性活动的结果，也不可避免的会被其他作品复制或者抄袭，因此，对建筑作品的法律保护也是相当必要的。在我国，建筑作品在2001年开始被单列一类作品受到保护，但是，立法仅仅是把建筑作品单列出来，对建筑作品的相关理论研究还不够，更缺乏相对具体的保护措施。对于建筑作品受法律保护的关键因素——独创性，更是缺乏明确的判断标准和实用的判断方法，导致在司法实践中，司法人员很难正确判断某一建筑作品是否具备独创性这一建筑作品受法律保护的必要条件。本文从一个在当时产生重大影响的案例——保时捷公司诉泰赫雅特公司建筑作品著作权纠纷一案出发，对比国内外关于一般作品的独创性理论，对建筑作品中独创性的内涵、判断标准、判断方法及其运用等进行了初步的探讨，力求提出切实可行的建筑作品独创性的判定方案，以期能对司法实践有所帮助和启发。本文主要分四个部分对建筑作品的独创性进行探讨。第一部分为问题的提出，对本文援引的案例进行了简要的介绍，并对法院的审判进行了深入的研究，对其审判中采纳的观点和理由做出了简单的价值判断，引出了目前我国司法实践中在判定建筑作品独创性时遇到的普遍困难。第二部分简要介绍了一般作品的独创性理论，分析了独创性理论的来源、内涵等内容，并从英美法系和大陆法系中具代表性的国家出发，探讨了有关作品独创性的判断标准和方法等方面的问题。第三部分是本文的核心部分，重点从建筑作品自身的特性出发，探讨了建筑作品独创性的内涵、判断标准、判断方法及其运用等内容。第四部分具体分析了目前我国在对建筑作品独创性在立法上的不足，并针对这些不足，提出了相应的完善方案，以期能帮助我国从制度方面对建筑作品的独创性判定进行完善和改革，为我国的司法实践提供现实依据。本文认为，，虽然独创性是任何作品都必须具备的基本要素，但是这一基本要素应该依据作品形式的不同，采取不同的要求程度和标准。建筑作品由于其自身包含三维的建筑物或者构筑物、建筑设计方案图和建筑模型等不同的表现形式，对其独创性的判断也应该针对不同的表现形式采取不同的标准，而不能一概而论。笔者期望通过本文对建筑作品独创性的探讨和认识，能够对完善我国建筑作品独创性的相关立法起到启发作用。
[Abstract]:With the development of society, intellectual property law has been gradually improved, more and more forms of works have been brought into the scope of copyright law protection. As a special kind of work, architectural works, like other forms of works, contain a lot of intellectual labor of designers, are the result of designers' creative activities, and will inevitably be copied or copied by other works. The legal protection of architectural works is also quite necessary. In our country, architectural works have been protected in 2001. However, the legislation is only to list the architectural works separately, and the related theoretical research on architectural works is not enough, let alone the relative specific protection measures. For the key factor of the protection of architectural works by law-originality, but also the lack of clear criteria and practical judgment methods, resulting in judicial practice, It is difficult for judicial personnel to correctly judge whether an architectural work possesses the necessary conditions for the legal protection of an architectural work. Starting from the case of Porsche Corporation v. the copyright dispute of Tyheyat's architectural works, this paper compares the originality theory of general works at home and abroad and the connotation of originality in architectural works. This paper makes a preliminary discussion on the judgment standard, judgment method and its application, and tries to put forward a feasible judgment scheme for the originality of the architectural works in order to be helpful and enlightening to the judicial practice. This paper mainly discusses the originality of architectural works in four parts. In the first part, the author makes a brief introduction to the cases cited in this paper, makes a deep study on the trial of the court, and makes a simple value judgment on the viewpoints and reasons adopted in the trial. This paper introduces the common difficulties in judging the originality of architectural works in the judicial practice of our country. The second part briefly introduces the originality theory of the general works, analyzes the origin and connotation of the originality theory, and sets out from the representative countries in the Anglo-American law system and the continental law system. This paper discusses the criteria and methods of judging the originality of the works. The third part is the core part of this paper, focusing on the characteristics of the architectural works, discusses the connotation of the originality of the architectural works, judgment criteria, judgment methods and their application. The fourth part concretely analyzes our country in the construction work originality in the legislation insufficiency, and in view of these insufficiency, proposed the corresponding consummation plan, It can help our country to perfect and reform the originality judgment of architectural works from the aspect of system, and provide the realistic basis for the judicial practice of our country. This paper holds that although originality is the essential element that any work must possess, this basic element should adopt different requirements and standards according to the different forms of the works. Because the architectural works contain three dimensional buildings or structures, architectural design plans and architectural models and other different forms of expression, the judgment of its originality should also take different standards for different forms of expression. You can't generalize. The author hopes that through the discussion and understanding of the originality of architectural works in this paper, it will be helpful to perfect the relevant legislation on the originality of architectural works in China.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.4

【参考文献】