發(fā)布時間：2018-06-16 02:20

  本文選題：技術(shù)保護(hù)措施 + 例外　； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：數(shù)字環(huán)境下技術(shù)保護(hù)措施成為著作權(quán)保護(hù)機(jī)制中的一個重要議題，，內(nèi)容專有領(lǐng)域和公有領(lǐng)域的應(yīng)然劃分因技術(shù)措施的采用而受到一定影響，將技術(shù)保護(hù)措施納入著作權(quán)法保護(hù)范圍，對諸如合理使用等代表公共利益的制度產(chǎn)生的影響日益深遠(yuǎn)，需要結(jié)合產(chǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展等實(shí)際需要，通過完善例外制度，來促進(jìn)技術(shù)措施及其法律保護(hù)機(jī)制正效應(yīng)的最大化發(fā)揮。 數(shù)字環(huán)境下原有的版權(quán)利益平衡格局被打破，技術(shù)保護(hù)措施這一私力救濟(jì)手段的興起在一定程度上緩和了版權(quán)人與使用人之間的利益沖突，但是在將技術(shù)保護(hù)措施納入法律保護(hù)范圍后，權(quán)利邊界的不確定性，以及“技術(shù)+法律+合同”這一商業(yè)模式在很大程度上限制了使用者自由借鑒他人智力成果等原本符合合理使用制度宗旨的使用行為，并對著作權(quán)法客體范圍和保護(hù)期限等制度的功效產(chǎn)生消極影響，由此需要完善技術(shù)保護(hù)措施例外制度，以應(yīng)對技術(shù)變革帶來的系列挑戰(zhàn)。 技術(shù)保護(hù)措施是一種不同于著作權(quán)及相關(guān)權(quán)但又與之緊密結(jié)合的特殊制度，受到著作權(quán)法的保護(hù)，相對應(yīng)地，技術(shù)措施法律保護(hù)也應(yīng)納入著作權(quán)限制制度的約束范圍，在制度完善中要注重公平和效率原則的指引作用�；跀�(shù)字環(huán)境的特殊性，技術(shù)保護(hù)措施例外制度的影響因素應(yīng)有不同于傳統(tǒng)環(huán)境下的新基準(zhǔn)，需要以利益平衡原則、風(fēng)險-效率原則和系統(tǒng)協(xié)調(diào)原則為評判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)或準(zhǔn)則，確保新的例外情形能融入已有的制度體系。 互聯(lián)網(wǎng)條約、歐盟版權(quán)指令以及美國、澳大利亞、日本等國家或者地區(qū)的立法都將技術(shù)保護(hù)措施納入保護(hù)范圍，但對技術(shù)保護(hù)措施的界定、是否規(guī)制與技術(shù)保護(hù)措施相關(guān)的“直接侵權(quán)行為”或者“間接侵權(quán)行為”或者對二者同時進(jìn)行規(guī)制存在不同程度的差異。美國DMCA中的更新機(jī)制，澳大利亞著作權(quán)法中協(xié)調(diào)著作權(quán)法和合同法之間的關(guān)系以及在私人使用方面的特殊規(guī)定，日本著作權(quán)法和反不正當(dāng)競爭法雙重保護(hù)等都為我國技術(shù)保護(hù)措施例外制度的完善提供了有益的啟迪。 我國現(xiàn)行關(guān)于版權(quán)技術(shù)保護(hù)措施及例外方面的立法在邏輯和體系層級上存在較大的問題，對技術(shù)保護(hù)措施的界定、范圍等的規(guī)定都不甚明晰，缺乏靈活的機(jī)制應(yīng)對技術(shù)變革的沖擊及公眾的迫切需求，也沒有針對著作權(quán)人濫用技術(shù)保護(hù)措施的行為安排規(guī)制機(jī)制。結(jié)合云計算技術(shù)及應(yīng)用之興起對權(quán)利流轉(zhuǎn)和利益配置的影響，需進(jìn)行綜合考量和前瞻性立法，從開放運(yùn)動、著作權(quán)集體管理組織等制度的意義及現(xiàn)實(shí)功能之局限性，有必要保留技術(shù)措施法律保護(hù)，并引入更新機(jī)制和規(guī)制機(jī)制，在促進(jìn)“產(chǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展”和“科技創(chuàng)新”的同時，有效保障公共利益，更好地實(shí)現(xiàn)著作權(quán)法的終極目標(biāo)。
[Abstract]:In the digital environment, technology protection measures have become an important topic in copyright protection mechanism. Due to the adoption of technical measures, the proper division between the proprietary and public domain of content has been affected to a certain extent. Bringing technology protection measures into the protection scope of copyright law has an increasingly far-reaching impact on systems representing public interests, such as rational use. It is necessary to improve the exceptional system in the light of practical needs such as industrial development. To promote the technical measures and legal protection mechanism to maximize the positive effects. In the digital environment, the original balance of copyright interests has been broken, and the rise of technical protection measures, as a private relief means, to some extent alleviates the conflict of interests between copyright owners and users. But after bringing technical protection measures into the scope of legal protection, there is uncertainty about the boundaries of rights, And the "technical legal contract", to a large extent, limits the users' freedom to use for reference other people's intellectual achievements, which were originally in line with the purpose of the rational use system. It also has a negative impact on the effectiveness of the object scope and the duration of protection of copyright law. Therefore, it is necessary to perfect the exceptional system of technical protection measures in order to meet the series of challenges brought by the technological change. The technical protection measure is a special system which is different from the copyright and related rights but closely combined with it. It is protected by the copyright law. Correspondingly, the legal protection of the technical measures should also be brought into the restriction scope of the copyright restriction system. Attention should be paid to the guiding role of the principles of fairness and efficiency in the perfection of the system. Based on the particularity of digital environment, the influencing factors of the exception system of technological protection measures should be different from the new benchmark under the traditional environment. The principle of balance of interests, the principle of risk-efficiency and the principle of system coordination should be taken as the criterion or criterion. Ensure that new exceptions are incorporated into the existing system. Internet treaties, EU copyright directives and the legislation of the United States, Australia, Japan, and other countries or regions all bring technology protection measures into the scope of protection, but define technology protection measures. Whether to regulate the "direct tort" or "indirect tort" related to the technical protection measures or to regulate the two acts at the same time has different degrees. The updating mechanism in the DMCA of the United States, the coordination of the relationship between copyright law and contract law in Australian copyright law and the special provisions on private use, The double protection of Japanese copyright law and anti-unfair competition law has provided beneficial enlightenment for the perfection of the exceptional system of technical protection measures in China. The current legislation on copyright technical protection measures and exceptions in our country has great problems at the level of logic and system, and the definition and scope of technical protection measures are not very clear. There is no flexible mechanism to deal with the impact of the technological change and the urgent needs of the public, and there is no mechanism to regulate the behavior of the copyright owners to abuse the technical protection measures. Combined with the impact of cloud computing technology and application on the rights flow and benefit allocation, it is necessary to carry out comprehensive consideration and forward-looking legislation, from the open movement, copyright collective management organization and other systems of significance and limitations of practical functions, It is necessary to retain the legal protection of technical measures, and introduce the renewal mechanism and regulation mechanism to promote "industrial development" and "scientific and technological innovation", at the same time, effectively protect public interests and better realize the ultimate goal of copyright law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D923.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 熊琦;;論“接觸權(quán)”——著作財產(chǎn)權(quán)類型化的不足與克服[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2008年05期

2 吳漢東;合理使用制度的法律價值分析[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;1996年03期

3 李揚(yáng);簡論技術(shù)措施和著作權(quán)的關(guān)系[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2003年09期

4 郭禾;規(guī)避技術(shù)措施行為的法律屬性辯析[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2004年10期

5 王博陽;;蘋果iTunes網(wǎng)上音樂商店:版權(quán)制度的未來模式?[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2009年06期

6 李士林;論技術(shù)措施之性質(zhì)[J];福建政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2005年03期

7 馮曉青;;論著作權(quán)限制的合理性及其在著作權(quán)制度價值構(gòu)造中的意義[J];湖南社會科學(xué);2011年05期

8 柳洪祥;;權(quán)利擴(kuò)張與權(quán)利限制的博弈 從平衡的視角審視著作權(quán)合理使用制度的重構(gòu)[J];法律適用;2007年09期

9 彭學(xué)龍;;論著作權(quán)語境下的獲取權(quán)[J];法商研究;2010年04期

10 馮曉青;;技術(shù)措施與著作權(quán)保護(hù)探討[J];法學(xué)雜志;2007年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 易健雄;技術(shù)發(fā)展與版權(quán)擴(kuò)張[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

2 吳偉光;數(shù)字技術(shù)環(huán)境下的版權(quán)法—危機(jī)與對策[D];中國社會科學(xué)院研究生院;2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 解麗軍;技術(shù)措施的著作權(quán)法保護(hù)研究[D];四川大學(xué);2005年

2 劉楠;技術(shù)措施的濫用和規(guī)制[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年

3 黃鵬翔;數(shù)字時代技術(shù)措施的法律保護(hù)比較研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年

4 周學(xué)敏;版權(quán)法上技術(shù)措施的濫用與對策[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

5 徐靈均;論版權(quán)技術(shù)措施的國際保護(hù)[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2008年

6 段華萍;論完善我國版權(quán)技術(shù)措施的法律保護(hù)[D];中國政法大學(xué);2008年

本文編號：2024780