本文選題：數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)　切入點(diǎn)：原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)　出處：《浙江工商大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：近年來(lái),數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)產(chǎn)業(yè)因其具有巨大的投資和經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值,已經(jīng)成為經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)中的一個(gè)重要產(chǎn)業(yè)。數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)作為人類智力創(chuàng)造的成果,需要巨大的制作投入,具有巨大的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值,卻極容易被復(fù)制,被大量的非法使用。但是我國(guó)對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)并沒(méi)有提供專門的法律給予保護(hù),在世界范圍內(nèi),對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)的法律保護(hù)也沒(méi)有形成統(tǒng)一的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。因此如何解決數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)的法律保護(hù)問(wèn)題已成為國(guó)內(nèi)外法律界關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)之一。 數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)有兩大基本類型：一是數(shù)據(jù)或其他材料的選擇、編排具有原創(chuàng)性,我們把它叫做原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)。二是數(shù)據(jù)或其他材料的選擇、編排不具有原創(chuàng)性,但有實(shí)質(zhì)性投入的,我們把它叫做非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)。本文以原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)與非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)為路徑,分別對(duì)兩者保護(hù)的有關(guān)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行分析,比較研究,探尋在我國(guó)建立行之有效的數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)體系的方法。 本文首先對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)概念、特征進(jìn)行法律界定,并基于洛克的財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)理論和休謨的實(shí)用主義財(cái)產(chǎn)說(shuō)對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)法律保護(hù)的必要性進(jìn)行了闡述。然后從總體上簡(jiǎn)要介紹世界范圍內(nèi)對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)法律保護(hù)的各種模式以及我國(guó)對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀。進(jìn)而分別對(duì)原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)和非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)保護(hù)展開分析論證。對(duì)由著作權(quán)保護(hù)的原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),主要針對(duì)理論上存在爭(zhēng)議,實(shí)踐中又很難判斷的獨(dú)創(chuàng)性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問(wèn)題運(yùn)用案例分析法和比較分析法進(jìn)行分析。對(duì)非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),本文分別考查美國(guó)不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法,歐盟《數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)法律保護(hù)指令》對(duì)非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)的特別權(quán)利保護(hù)內(nèi)容以及德國(guó)《著作權(quán)法》對(duì)非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)的鄰接權(quán)保護(hù)的內(nèi)容。運(yùn)用比較分析法,提出鄰接權(quán)保護(hù)非獨(dú)創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)比特別權(quán)利保護(hù)更適合,而不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法可作為法律最后的一個(gè)兜底保護(hù)手段。最后提出如何構(gòu)建我國(guó)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)體系,提出具體的立法修改內(nèi)容。建議借鑒德國(guó)的著作權(quán)法,形成著作權(quán)法統(tǒng)一下的數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)雙軌保護(hù)體系,即著作權(quán)法保護(hù)原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),鄰接權(quán)保護(hù)非原創(chuàng)性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法兜底保護(hù)。
[Abstract]:In recent years, because of its huge investment and economic value, database industry has become an important industry in economic society. As a result of human intelligence creation, database industry needs huge production investment and has great economic value. But our country does not provide special laws to protect the database, in the world, The legal protection of database has not formed a unified standard, so how to solve the problem of legal protection of database has become one of the focuses of domestic and foreign legal circles. There are two basic types of database: one is the choice of data or other materials, the arrangement is original, we call it the original database, the other is the choice of data or other materials, the arrangement is not original, but it has substantial input. We call it the non-original database. This paper takes the original database and the non-original database as the path to analyze and compare the protection of the two databases. This paper explores the methods of establishing an effective database intellectual property protection system in China. First of all, this paper defines the concept and characteristics of database by law. Based on Locke's theory of property right and Hume's theory of practical property, this paper expounds the necessity of the legal protection of database. The current situation of database protection in our country. Then the analysis and argumentation of original database and non-original database protection are carried out respectively. Case analysis and comparative analysis are used to analyze the originality standard, which is controversial in theory and difficult to judge in practice. For the non-original database, this paper examines the unfair competition law in the United States. The European Union's Directive on the legal Protection of databases, the contents of special rights protection for non-original databases, and the contents of the German copyright Law for the protection of neighboring rights of non-original databases. It is put forward that the non-original database of neighboring right protection is more suitable than special right protection, and unfair competition law can be used as the last protection means of law. Finally, the author puts forward how to construct the intellectual property protection system of database in China. It is suggested that the dual system of database protection under the unification of copyright law should be formed, that is, copyright law protects originality database, neighbor right protection non-originality database, Unfair competition law is protected.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江工商大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D923.41

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 鄭英龍;;期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)法律保護(hù)研究[J];中國(guó)出版;2013年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：1660582