著作权法下戏仿的保护和限制

发布时间：2018-06-18 12:05

本文选题：戏仿 + 合理使用　；参考：《中国政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 戏仿作品在我国自古有之,但是由于中国传统的权利观念普遍缺乏人格独立意识,权利观念也极端淡化,近代根本就没有著作权制度,自然也就不存在对戏仿作品的规制。从清朝末年我国历史上第一部著作权法《大清著作权律》的颁布,到2010年再次修改现行《著作权法》,我国的法律发展史中从未对戏仿这类作品作出过相关的规定,甚至学界的研究也是近20年才开始。直到网络视频作品《一个馒头引发的血案》(以下简称《馒头》)的出现,戏仿这一现象才开始引起大量学者的关注。也是在这一时期,学界才开始注意到,由于网络创作的便捷、成本的低廉、以及网络传播的迅速性,类似这样的戏仿作品在网络上数量庞大,而戏仿作品在我国现行的法律下,一般情况下都会被认定为侵权。但是这类作品有其存在的正当性和需求,而且只要对其施加一定的限制,使其符合著作权法的精神,实际上不会对现有的法律秩序造成负面的影响。相反,若是严格执行我国现行的法律制度,将会限制戏仿作品的创作,阻碍知识的传播和文化的交流,也在某种程度上影响到了公民的言论自由。因此,鉴于戏仿作品和我国相关法律制度的现状,本文试图在现有的法律大框架下,为戏仿作品寻找生存空间,对合法的戏仿作品进行保护,而对以戏仿为外衣的侵权作品进行限制。本文以《馒头》案为引,第一章通过对戏仿定义,界定什么样的作品才是戏仿作品。通过区分文艺领域和法律领域对戏仿的不同要求,对现有的作品进行分类,归纳戏仿作品呈现出来的区别与其他类型作品的特点,将戏仿作品与讽刺作品区分开来,也为下文论证为什么戏仿作品在引用原作时与其它类型的作品要适用不同的标准,做出了铺垫。最后依照《馒头》的具体情况,得出结论：《馒头》属于法律下的戏仿作品。第二章仍以《馒头》入手,结合我国《著作权法》的相关规定,分析戏仿作品作者与在先作品著作权人的权利冲突。本章从人身权和财产权两个方面,对《馒头》作品进行具体的分析,最后由个别归纳到一般,总结戏仿作品在我国现行的法律框架下究竟会存在那些问题,为什么会涉及到侵权,尤其是网络环境下的戏仿作品还存在哪些新的特征,会遇到哪些新的问题。第三章针对戏仿作品本身有存在的合理性和现行法律中存在的冲突,从法理、宪法、经济学三个角度为戏仿作品存在的必要性提供理论上的支持的依据。第四章鉴于美国对于戏仿制度的研究,除了成文法的规定,还提供了大量生动、丰富的案例,因此本文主要借鉴美国法中关于戏仿作品的相关判决,从合理使用的标准角度进行分析,进一步细化戏仿合法化需要具备的条件。第五章通过对以上对戏仿存在的必要性、现行法律对其权利界定不明,以及其他国家较为丰富的相关经验的分析,从立法、司法裁判角度对完善我国相关制度提供了几点建议。最终得出结论：戏仿在我国有存在的必要性,也可以通过修改相关立法,借鉴其它国家的制度,达到对戏仿作品进行保护和限制的目的。
[Abstract]:The parody works in our country since ancient times, but because of the traditional concept of Chinese traditional rights, there is a lack of personality and independence consciousness, the concept of rights is also extremely desalinization. In modern times, there is no copyright system in modern times, and there is no regulation of parody. In 2010, the current copyright law was amended again. In the history of the development of the law of China, there has never been a relevant regulation on parody. Even the study of the academic circles has not begun for nearly 20 years. It is also in this period that the academic circles have begun to notice that as a result of the convenience of the creation of the network, the low cost and the rapid propagation of the network, the number of parody works on the network is large, and the parody works under the current law of our country are generally considered to be torts. But such works have its existence. Legitimacy and demand, as long as it is applied to it
Certain restrictions, in conformity with the spirit of copyright law, will not actually have a negative impact on the existing legal order. On the contrary, if the current legal system of our country is strictly enforced, the creation of parody works will be restricted, the dissemination of knowledge and cultural exchange will be hindered, and the freedom of speech of citizens will be affected to some extent. In view of the present situation of the parody works and the relevant legal system of our country, this article tries to find the living space for the parody works under the existing legal framework, to protect the legitimate parody works, and to restrict the infringing works with parody as a coat.
In the first chapter, the first chapter defines what kind of work is parody through the definition of parody. By distinguishing the different requirements of Parody in the field of literature and art and the legal field, it classifies the existing works, sums up the differences between the parody works and the characteristics of other types of works, and makes parody and satirical works. In addition, it also demonstrates why the parody works apply different standards to other types of works in reference to the original works and make a paving. Finally, according to the specific circumstances of "steamed bread >", "steamed bread > belongs to the parody under the law."
The second chapter still starts with the "steamed bread" and analyzes the rights conflict between the author of the parody works and the copyright owner of the first works, combining with the relevant provisions of the copyright law of China. This chapter makes a concrete analysis of the works of "steamed bread >" from two aspects of personal right and property right, and finally sums up to the general, and summarizes the current legal frame of the parody works in our country. What are the problems that exist under the frame, and why it involves infringement, especially the new features of the parody in the network environment, and what new problems will be encountered.
The third chapter, in view of the rationality of the parody itself and the conflict in the current law, provides the basis of theoretical support for the necessity of the existence of parody works from the three angles of jurisprudence, constitution and economics.
In the fourth chapter, in view of the study of the parody system in the United States, in addition to the provisions of the written law, a large number of vivid and rich cases are provided. Therefore, this article mainly draws on the relevant judgments of the parody works in the American law and analyzes the standard from the standard of rational use, further refining the conditions required for the legalization of parody.
The fifth chapter, through the necessity of the existence of parody, the definition of the rights of the current law, and the analysis of the more abundant related experiences in other countries, provides some suggestions on improving our country's relevant system from the angle of legislation and judicial refereeing. We should change relevant legislation and draw lessons from other countries' systems to achieve the purpose of protecting and restricting parody works.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D923.41

【参考文献】