最终用户的刑事责任分析

发布时间：2018-06-11 17:43

本文选题：最终用户 + 侵犯著作权　；参考：《中国政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着网络技术的发展,最终用户使用盗版的行为业已成为一种比较突出的社会现象。论文对最终用户使用盗版的行为是否应当承担法律责任以及承担怎样的法律责任进行了论证。论文共分为以下五章: 第一章为最终用户的概述。本部分对最终用户及最终用户涉及侵犯著作权的行为进行了概述,认为最终用户是指以使用为目的,对享有著作权的作品进行最终消费的自然人、法人或者其他组织,具有广泛性、使用性、终端性和非限定性等特征。最终用户涉及侵犯著作权的行为是指最终用户未经著作权人许可,使用侵权复制品或者最终用户超出著作权人许可范围,使用享有著作权作品的行为,具有隐蔽性、高发性、手段多样性和公众容忍性等特点。第二章为主张最终用户不负刑事责任的观点。本部分对主张最终用户不应承担刑事责任的观点进行了梳理,主张最终用户不应承担刑事责任的观点又分为免责论、有益论和民事责任论三种理论形态。免责论认为,最终用户使用盗版的行为应当免除法律责任;有益论认为,最终用户使用盗版的行为具有积极意义,不仅不应该承担法律责任,而是可以鼓励的行为;民事责任论认为,最终用户使用盗版的行为至多只涉及到民事责任的追究。第三章为主张最终用户应负刑事责任的观点。本部分对主张最终用户应负刑事责任的观点进行介绍。根据主张承担刑事责任的主体范围的不同,最终用户应负刑事责任的观点又有全部最终用户应负刑事责任和商业性最终用户应负刑事责任两种理论样态。全责论的观点主张刑事责任的追究延伸到全部最终用户;区分论的观点则主张对最终用户使用盗版的行为刑事责任的追究只限于商业性最终用户。第四章为一般性最终用户入罪化批判。本部分对一般性最终用户入罪化进行了批判。一般性最终用户进行入罪化观点不符合刑法的谦抑性要求,也脱离了现行刑法罪名体系。刑法的谦抑性要求只有在社会大众眼里某种行为的社会危害性显著到不能容忍时,才可以考虑在刑事立法上对该种行为规定刑事处罚。一般性最终用户使用盗版的行为不具有“营利的目的”,不符合“违法所得数额较大”条件。另外,外国立法例不能成为我国借鉴的理由。第五章为商业性最终用户入罪化批判。本部分对主张商业性最终用户入罪化观点进行了批判。商业性最终用户入罪化观点的两大支柱理由是:“以营利为目的”和“商业性使用行为”可以扩张解释。事实上,“以避免支出为目的”与“以营利为目的”中的间接营利具有本质区别;“商业性使用行为”不能被纳入到“复制行为”之中。另外,将机关、事业单位和社会团体等最终用户的商业性使用行为也纳入刑事罪名体系有悖于宽严相济的刑事政策。第六章为现行刑事政策视野中最终用问题的解决。本部分认为,我国目前对著作权仍然采取弱保护的战略,并且短期内还不具备过渡到强保护的社会基础和法治环境,因此,对追究商业性最终用户追究刑事责任的问题可以作为一种前瞻性的探讨,但是不宜进入对现阶段实施的现实性探讨。现阶段强化知识产权的保护水平应该是着眼于加大对商业性最终用户使用盗版行为的司法适用力度。
[Abstract]:With the development of network technology, the behavior of the end users to use piracy has become a relatively prominent social phenomenon. This paper discusses whether the user should take legal responsibility and assume the legal responsibility for the use of piracy. The thesis is divided into the following five chapters:
The first chapter is an overview of the end user. This section provides an overview of the end user and end user involving the infringement of copyright. It is considered that the end user refers to the natural, legal, or other organizations, with the purpose of use, for the final consumption of copyrighted works, with the nature of universality, usability, terminal and unqualification. The behavior of the end user involving copyright infringement means that the end user, without the permission of the copyright owner, uses the infringed replicas or the end user beyond the permission of the copyright owner, and uses the acts of copyright works, which have the characteristics of concealment, high incidence, diversity of means and public tolerance.
The second chapter is the point of view that the end user does not bear criminal responsibility. This part combs the viewpoint that the end user should not bear the criminal responsibility. The view that the end user should not bear the criminal responsibility is divided into the disclaimer theory, the beneficial theory and the civil liability theory in three theoretical forms. The disclaimer thinks that the end user uses the pirated line In order to be exempt from legal responsibility, the beneficial theory holds that the end user's use of piracy is positive, not only should not take legal responsibility, but can be encouraged. The civil liability theory holds that the end user's use of piracy is at most only involving civil liability.
The third chapter is the point of view that the end user should be responsible for the criminal responsibility. This part introduces the view that the end user should be responsible for the criminal responsibility. According to the different subject scope of the criminal responsibility, the end user should be responsible for the criminal responsibility and all end-users should be responsible for criminal responsibility and commercial end user. There are two theoretical forms of responsibility. The view of the full accountability extends the criminal responsibility to all end-users; the point of distinction advocates that the criminal responsibility for the use of piracy for the end user is limited to the commercial end user.
The fourth chapter is the criticism of the incriminalization of the general end user. This part criticizes the incriminalization of the general end user. The general end user's incriminalization view does not conform to the humility requirement of the criminal law, and is divorced from the current criminal law system. The modest requirement of the criminal law is only the social harm of some behavior in the eyes of the public. When sex is not tolerable, it is possible to consider criminal penalties for this kind of act in criminal legislation. The general end user's use of piracy does not have the "purpose of profit" and does not conform to the "large amount of illegal income". In addition, foreign legislation can not be a reason for our country to learn from.
The fifth chapter is the critique of the incriminalization of commercial end users. This part criticizes the point of view of the incriminalization of commercial end users. The two main reasons for the incriminalization of commercial end users are that "for profit making" and "commercial use behavior" can be expanded to explain. In fact, "to avoid expenditure as the purpose" and " The indirect profit in profit for profit has essential difference; "commercial use behavior" can not be incorporated into the "duplication behavior". In addition, the commercial use behavior of the end users, such as organs, institutions and social groups, is also included in the criminal policy which is contrary to the leniency of the criminal offense.
The sixth chapter is the solution to the final use of the current criminal policy. In this part, we think that our country still adopts a strategy of weak protection for copyright, and does not have the social basis and the rule of law in the short term. Therefore, the question of investigating the criminal responsibility for commercial final users can be considered as a prospect. It is not suitable to explore the reality of the current implementation. At this stage, the level of strengthening the protection of intellectual property rights should be focused on increasing the judicial application of the use of piracy for commercial end users.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D924;D923.41

【参考文献】