發(fā)布時間：2018-06-11 17:43

  本文選題：最終用戶 + 侵犯著作權��； 參考：《中國政法大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著網(wǎng)絡技術的發(fā)展,最終用戶使用盜版的行為業(yè)已成為一種比較突出的社會現(xiàn)象。論文對最終用戶使用盜版的行為是否應當承擔法律責任以及承擔怎樣的法律責任進行了論證。論文共分為以下五章: 第一章為最終用戶的概述。本部分對最終用戶及最終用戶涉及侵犯著作權的行為進行了概述,認為最終用戶是指以使用為目的,對享有著作權的作品進行最終消費的自然人、法人或者其他組織,具有廣泛性、使用性、終端性和非限定性等特征。最終用戶涉及侵犯著作權的行為是指最終用戶未經著作權人許可,使用侵權復制品或者最終用戶超出著作權人許可范圍,使用享有著作權作品的行為,具有隱蔽性、高發(fā)性、手段多樣性和公眾容忍性等特點。 第二章為主張最終用戶不負刑事責任的觀點。本部分對主張最終用戶不應承擔刑事責任的觀點進行了梳理,主張最終用戶不應承擔刑事責任的觀點又分為免責論、有益論和民事責任論三種理論形態(tài)。免責論認為,最終用戶使用盜版的行為應當免除法律責任;有益論認為,最終用戶使用盜版的行為具有積極意義,不僅不應該承擔法律責任,而是可以鼓勵的行為;民事責任論認為,最終用戶使用盜版的行為至多只涉及到民事責任的追究。 第三章為主張最終用戶應負刑事責任的觀點。本部分對主張最終用戶應負刑事責任的觀點進行介紹。根據(jù)主張承擔刑事責任的主體范圍的不同,最終用戶應負刑事責任的觀點又有全部最終用戶應負刑事責任和商業(yè)性最終用戶應負刑事責任兩種理論樣態(tài)。全責論的觀點主張刑事責任的追究延伸到全部最終用戶;區(qū)分論的觀點則主張對最終用戶使用盜版的行為刑事責任的追究只限于商業(yè)性最終用戶。 第四章為一般性最終用戶入罪化批判。本部分對一般性最終用戶入罪化進行了批判。一般性最終用戶進行入罪化觀點不符合刑法的謙抑性要求,也脫離了現(xiàn)行刑法罪名體系。刑法的謙抑性要求只有在社會大眾眼里某種行為的社會危害性顯著到不能容忍時,才可以考慮在刑事立法上對該種行為規(guī)定刑事處罰。一般性最終用戶使用盜版的行為不具有“營利的目的”,不符合“違法所得數(shù)額較大”條件。另外,外國立法例不能成為我國借鑒的理由。 第五章為商業(yè)性最終用戶入罪化批判。本部分對主張商業(yè)性最終用戶入罪化觀點進行了批判。商業(yè)性最終用戶入罪化觀點的兩大支柱理由是:“以營利為目的”和“商業(yè)性使用行為”可以擴張解釋。事實上,“以避免支出為目的”與“以營利為目的”中的間接營利具有本質區(qū)別;“商業(yè)性使用行為”不能被納入到“復制行為”之中。另外,將機關、事業(yè)單位和社會團體等最終用戶的商業(yè)性使用行為也納入刑事罪名體系有悖于寬嚴相濟的刑事政策。 第六章為現(xiàn)行刑事政策視野中最終用問題的解決。本部分認為,我國目前對著作權仍然采取弱保護的戰(zhàn)略,并且短期內還不具備過渡到強保護的社會基礎和法治環(huán)境,因此,對追究商業(yè)性最終用戶追究刑事責任的問題可以作為一種前瞻性的探討,但是不宜進入對現(xiàn)階段實施的現(xiàn)實性探討�，F(xiàn)階段強化知識產權的保護水平應該是著眼于加大對商業(yè)性最終用戶使用盜版行為的司法適用力度。
[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.
【學位授予單位】：中國政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D924;D923.41

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 張志強;盜版的正反功能分析[J];編輯之友;2005年02期

2 張明楷;論刑法的謙抑性[J];法商研究(中南政法學院學報);1995年04期

3 黃京平;;和諧社會語境下的刑法學新思維[J];法學家;2007年01期

4 于志剛;李懷勝;;網(wǎng)絡犯罪危害性的公眾認知異化及其反思[J];貴州民族學院學報(哲學社會科學版);2008年05期

5 孫萬懷;侵犯知識產權犯罪刑事責任基礎構造比較[J];華東政法學院學報;1999年02期

6 陳慶安;;侵犯著作權行為的刑事法分析[J];河南社會科學;2006年02期

7 王瑞,吳惒光,王素娟;論著作權的刑法保護[J];檢察實踐;2005年01期

8 常青;;論軟件最終用戶侵犯著作權之刑事責任[J];科技與法律;2006年02期

9 劉明江;;論知識產權保護水平——以國家知識產權戰(zhàn)略為視野[J];昆明理工大學學報(社會科學版);2007年03期

10 張娜;;當前中國盜版問題的經濟學分析[J];蘭州學刊;2008年10期

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 孫祥壯;知識產權法治構造的理論邏輯[D];南京師范大學;2007年

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 孔維剛;我國國家知識產權戰(zhàn)略發(fā)展動態(tài)評析[D];貴州師范大學;2006年

，

本文編號：2006132