续写作品的著作权研究
发布时间：2018-10-24 13:42
【摘要】：回溯考究其历史,早已有《红楼梦》后二十章回高鹗的续写以及鲁迅对神话作品的续写等。直到我国对知识产权的舶来,让续写作品的法律性质问题初现端倪。于是90年代知识产权学术界开始反思、界定,但是仍然没有达成一致的通说。并且基于当时信息的不发达,让续写作品的传播受限,以至于续写作品是否侵权问题无人问津与重视。随着时代科技的发展,网络成为信息传播的有效途径。特别是网络原创小说的发展,滋生了续写作品的空间,间接鼓励了网民对自己喜爱的连载作品进行抢先续写的行为。于是利益的冲突异常激烈地在盛大起点网与受读吧网间展开,也拉开了对于续写作品问题的“战争”。社会界人士有的认为是抄袭,有的认为是基于原著之上扩展的原创作品。而法律界人士则从著作权制度和不正当竞争的角度辨析续写行为。有的学者认为其侵犯了保护作品完整权,是破坏作品完整性的一种特殊方式;有的认为其侵犯了虚拟人物的形象权;认为续写作品侵犯了原作的名称权,应通过保护作品的名称保护原作者的权利;有的认为其不属于合理使用的范围;有的认为其是属于演绎权规制范围;有的认为其根本就不构成侵权,甚者从不正当竞争的角度解读续写行为。续写作品的层出不穷反而更加反映了文艺界的繁荣程度,从法律的角度调整续写是违背著作权立法根本目的的行为。高潮迭起的争论如火如荼最根本原因也在于现行著作权法对此行为并无明确规定,让问题的凸显与解决机制之间高度不对称,至此矛盾日益突出。法律的责任和其存在的价值就在于对社会现象问题的调整以及冲突的解决。其在知识产权领域尤为突出。智力成果是随着科技的发展而不断进步,知识产权制度的构建必须跟上时代的步伐。因此,因此,填补著作权法对续写行为的空缺迫在眉睫。 本文分为四部分: 第一部分:案例引导;本论文将举出国内国外两个典型案例。聚焦争议点,从而提出讨论的中心问题—续写作品是否侵权;同时,梳理续写行为所带来的负面影响,从问题的解析深入了解和探究该问题的本质。 第二部分:基础理论;将对续写作品的概念、特征、类型进行归纳总结。主要通过辨析的方式,对比现有提出的学者观点,提出自己的论点。 第三部分:侵权探讨;续写行为是否侵权,现今学界仍然无通说。因此,该部分以列举的方式梳理各类观点,最终突出自己的想法。而逻辑的起点以原著作品与续写作品间的形似比较:其是思想相似还是表达相似;是否具有合理使用的抗辩理由。其次,如果上述条件满足,论证其符合著作权保护的作品的情况下,该续写作品是否侵犯了原著作者的其他著作权。 第四部分:简单构想;最后,对续写作者的权益与原著作者的权益进行对照权衡,公平合理的进行权利设置,解决续写行为带来的著作权纠纷。
[Abstract]:Looking back on its history, there has been a sequel to the later 20 chapters of the Dream of the Red Mansions and Lu Xun's continuation of mythological works. Until the import of intellectual property rights, let the legal nature of the continuation of the work. So intellectual property academia began to reflect on, define, but still did not reach agreement. And based on the underdevelopment of information at that time, the dissemination of the continued works is limited, so that whether the infringement of the continued works is ignored. With the development of science and technology, the network becomes an effective way to spread information. In particular, the development of original novels on the Internet breeds space for the continuation of works, and indirectly encourages netizens to preempt the sequel of their favorite serial works. So the conflict of interest between the Shanda starting point and the read-out network, also opened the issue of the continuation of the "war." Some members of the community believe that plagiarism, some are based on the original work expansion of the original work. But the legal profession personage from the copyright system and the unfair competition angle discriminates the continuation behavior. Some scholars think that it infringes the right to protect the integrity of the work, which is a special way to destroy the integrity of the work; others think that it infringes the image right of the virtual character; and that the continuation of the work infringes the right of the name of the original work, The rights of the original author should be protected by protecting the title of the work; some think that it does not belong to the scope of reasonable use; some think it belongs to the scope of deductive right regulation; others think that it does not constitute an infringement at all. Even from the point of view of unfair competition interpretation of sequel behavior. On the contrary, the endless emergence of continuous works reflects the prosperity of the literary and art circles. It is against the fundamental purpose of copyright legislation to adjust the continuation from the angle of law. The root cause of the rising controversy is that the current copyright law does not clearly stipulate this behavior, which makes the problem highlight and solve the mechanism of a high degree of asymmetry, so that the contradiction is becoming more and more prominent. The responsibility of law and its value lies in the adjustment of social phenomena and the settlement of conflicts. It is especially prominent in the field of intellectual property. With the development of science and technology, the construction of intellectual property system must keep pace with the times. Therefore, it is urgent to fill the gap in copyright law. This paper is divided into four parts: the first part: case guidance, this paper will cite two typical cases at home and abroad. Focusing on the controversial points, this paper puts forward the central issue of discussion-whether the continuation of the work is infringing; at the same time, combing the negative effects of the sequel behavior, and deeply understanding and exploring the nature of the problem from the analysis of the problem. The second part: basic theory, will summarize the concept, characteristics and types of the continued works. Mainly through the way of discrimination, compared with the existing scholars point of view, put forward their own arguments. The third part: torts; whether the continuation of the act of infringement, there is still no reason for the academic community. Therefore, this part combs each kind of viewpoint in the enumeration way, finally highlights own idea. The logical starting point is the similarity comparison between the original works and the continued works: is it ideological or expressive similarity, and whether there is a reasonable use of the defense. Secondly, if the above conditions are satisfied, it is proved that if the work conforms to the copyright protection, the continuation works may infringe the other copyright of the original author. The fourth part: simple idea; finally, the author's rights and interests are compared with the original author's rights and interests, fair and reasonable to set up the right to solve the copyright disputes caused by the continuation of the act.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D923.41
本文编号：2291572
[Abstract]:Looking back on its history, there has been a sequel to the later 20 chapters of the Dream of the Red Mansions and Lu Xun's continuation of mythological works. Until the import of intellectual property rights, let the legal nature of the continuation of the work. So intellectual property academia began to reflect on, define, but still did not reach agreement. And based on the underdevelopment of information at that time, the dissemination of the continued works is limited, so that whether the infringement of the continued works is ignored. With the development of science and technology, the network becomes an effective way to spread information. In particular, the development of original novels on the Internet breeds space for the continuation of works, and indirectly encourages netizens to preempt the sequel of their favorite serial works. So the conflict of interest between the Shanda starting point and the read-out network, also opened the issue of the continuation of the "war." Some members of the community believe that plagiarism, some are based on the original work expansion of the original work. But the legal profession personage from the copyright system and the unfair competition angle discriminates the continuation behavior. Some scholars think that it infringes the right to protect the integrity of the work, which is a special way to destroy the integrity of the work; others think that it infringes the image right of the virtual character; and that the continuation of the work infringes the right of the name of the original work, The rights of the original author should be protected by protecting the title of the work; some think that it does not belong to the scope of reasonable use; some think it belongs to the scope of deductive right regulation; others think that it does not constitute an infringement at all. Even from the point of view of unfair competition interpretation of sequel behavior. On the contrary, the endless emergence of continuous works reflects the prosperity of the literary and art circles. It is against the fundamental purpose of copyright legislation to adjust the continuation from the angle of law. The root cause of the rising controversy is that the current copyright law does not clearly stipulate this behavior, which makes the problem highlight and solve the mechanism of a high degree of asymmetry, so that the contradiction is becoming more and more prominent. The responsibility of law and its value lies in the adjustment of social phenomena and the settlement of conflicts. It is especially prominent in the field of intellectual property. With the development of science and technology, the construction of intellectual property system must keep pace with the times. Therefore, it is urgent to fill the gap in copyright law. This paper is divided into four parts: the first part: case guidance, this paper will cite two typical cases at home and abroad. Focusing on the controversial points, this paper puts forward the central issue of discussion-whether the continuation of the work is infringing; at the same time, combing the negative effects of the sequel behavior, and deeply understanding and exploring the nature of the problem from the analysis of the problem. The second part: basic theory, will summarize the concept, characteristics and types of the continued works. Mainly through the way of discrimination, compared with the existing scholars point of view, put forward their own arguments. The third part: torts; whether the continuation of the act of infringement, there is still no reason for the academic community. Therefore, this part combs each kind of viewpoint in the enumeration way, finally highlights own idea. The logical starting point is the similarity comparison between the original works and the continued works: is it ideological or expressive similarity, and whether there is a reasonable use of the defense. Secondly, if the above conditions are satisfied, it is proved that if the work conforms to the copyright protection, the continuation works may infringe the other copyright of the original author. The fourth part: simple idea; finally, the author's rights and interests are compared with the original author's rights and interests, fair and reasonable to set up the right to solve the copyright disputes caused by the continuation of the act.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D923.41
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前8条
1 孙静;;续写作品著作权问题研究[J];电子知识产权;2008年10期
2 李亮,王静;论续写作品的著作权保护[J];贵州警官职业学院学报;2005年01期
3 李亮;论续写作品的著作权保护[J];河北法学;2005年02期
4 孙国瑞;续写作品及有关问题研究[J];科技与法律;1994年03期
5 金渝林;论作品的独创性[J];法学研究;1995年04期
6 易继明;评财产权劳动学说[J];法学研究;2000年03期
7 李雨峰,王玫黎;保护作品完整权的重构——对我国著作权法相关条款的质疑[J];法学论坛;2003年02期
8 权彦敏;徐正大;;从两则版权案例谈续写作品的合理使用[J];中国出版;2010年19期
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 孙鹏;物权公示论[D];西南政法大学;2003年
，本文编号：2291572
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/chubanfaxing/2291572.html
