:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:從著作財產權授權利用之困境探討創作共享機制之推展
書刊名:東吳法律學報
作者:盧文祥
作者(外文):Lu, Wen-hsiang
出版日期:2005
卷期:17:2
頁次:頁249-296
主題關鍵詞:創作共享公共園地著作權利用授權利用Creative commonsPublic domainUtilization of copyrightsUtilization of authorization
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(5) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:23
  • 點閱點閱:113
本文嘗試由著作權法制之回顧,描述我國著作權法制與世界貿易組織(WTO)其他各會員國相同,採創作保護主義;亦即創作人於完成創作時即自動取得各種著作人格權及著作財產權,如其取得權利後未明白宣示拋棄該權利或提供權利分享之聲明,則現行著作權法對其權利之預設保護即會依權利人之主張給予民刑事訴追之權利。 一般而言,他人對於已受著作權法保護之各類著作,如欲進行利用時,依法須得到著作權人之授權或同意(第37條第1項);惟實務上,達成授權且依約履行並非易事,且均會衍生若干交易成本,包括:蒐尋成本、協商成本、執行成本,授權愈難成本愈高;抑有進者,我國著作權法並不強制著作人應標示其姓名或連絡方式(即使現有「權利管理電子資訊」措施,係賦予權利人有該管理權利而非強制義務),利用人常會因不知著作為何人所有,或雖知權利人為何人但都無法取得連繫等情,致常發生無法達成授權之情事。 本文即在剖析上述著作財產權授權利用之困境後,更強調在知識經濟時代中於網路環境中上述不易取得授權之情形更是雪上加霜,動輒即有侵權之虞,轉而介紹國外部分自由派學者因不滿各國現行著作權法過度向權利人傾斜之保護方式,遂有以美國史丹福大學Lawrence Lessig教授為首之有識之士,倡議Creative Commons (創作共享)(以下簡稱CC)之運動—由創作人自發性將仍受著作權法保護之創作以簡易符號標示而與不特定利用人立約達成釋出全部或部分著作權權益之作法,此一機制可謂解決上述授權困擾,且帶來些許曙光,此一運動經由美國於二○○三年展開以來,已獲三十餘個國家支持,我國係由中央研究院資訊科學研究所及法律研究所(籌備處)率先響應,現已完成CC授權條款中文2.0版之工作,經濟部智慧財產局亦協助其進行各項推廣工作,以期促成創用雙方完成知識分享及創作接棒之適宜環境。 本文文末則針對CC授權機制與我國現行著作權法既有之意定授權應如何併行調和之,及我國於二○○三年及二○○四年分別新加入之「權利管理電子資訊」及「防盜拷措施」之施行如何配合提供看法,並未雨網繆在我國推廣CC運動之際,提出應配合推動網路信任機制或利用電子簽章機制來確保創作共享制度在我國後續發展配套之呼籲,使CC運動可以在我國穩健紮根,並使我國免費知識分享平台早日完成且日益豐富。
This article attempts to describe how the ROC copyright legal system is similar to other WTO members through looking at the retrospect of its copyright system. The ROC copyright system adopts the principle of creative protection, which means the copyright of a work and the rights of the creator are automatically protected when the work is completed. Unless the creator of the work renounces his own rights or agrees to share the copyright, his rights are protected by the Copyright Act and are guaranteed civil and criminal prosecution rights. Generally speaking, when a third party wishes to use a copyrighted work, he must obtain authorization or consent from the copyright holder(Artic1e 37.1). In practice, however, reaching an authorization agreement and implementing such agreement are not easy tasks, since these involve certain trading costs, namely, search costs, negotiation costs, and implementation costs. In other words, the more complicated the authorization is, the higher the cost will be. Since the ROC Copyright Act does not require the copyright holder to display his name or contact information (although there is an Electronic Rights Management Information mechanism in place, it provides the right holder with management rights and is not compulsory), in many cases, the users do not know who the copyrighted work belongs to or cannot contact the right holder since no contacts are provided. As a resu1t, authorization agreement cannot be reached. This article analyzes the dilemma of the above copyright authorization and use, and emphasizes the difficulty of obtaining authorization for work posted on the Internet, since in a knowledge-based economy era, the use of work on the Internet can easily result in copyright infringements. This article then continues to introduce the discontentment that some liberal scholars have expressed toward copyright laws the world over being overly protecting of right holders. Among them, is Professor Lawrence Lessig of Stanford University, who proposed the concept of Creative Commons(CC), whereas the creator voluntarily shares his copyrighted work with non-specified users by marking the work with simple symbols to indicate whether the work can be shared in whole or in parts. This mechanism has shed some light on the problem of authorization. Since its campaign began in 2003, CC has already received support from over thirty countries. In the ROC, the Academia Sinica’s Institute of Information Science and Institute of Law (Preparatory Office) took the lead in echoing such campaign. Currently, the 2.0 Chinese version of the CC license has been completed. The Taiwan Intellectual Property Office is also providing assistance to the Academic Sinica to promote such campaign, so that a sound environment for knowledge sharing can be created for the creators and users. In closing, this article looks at how the CC licensing mechanism can be incorporated into the existing authorization system of the Copyright Act, and also how it can harmonize with the newly added Electronic Rights Management Information of 2003 and the Technical Protection Measures of 2004. In addition, while the ROC is in its initial stage of promoting CC, this article proposes to incorporate an Internet confidential mechanism or the use of an electronic signature mechanism to ensure sustainable development of Creative Commons in the ROC. This method will help the CC campaign take roots in the ROC and facilitate the early completion of a free information-sharing platform.
期刊論文
1.王明禮、李界昇、周威秀、林三元、林明儀、林郁菁、林夢平、張睿元、雷雅雯、蔡惠如、蕭敏(20040400)。網際網路法發展趨勢特別報導。科技法學評論,1(1),1-59。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.謝銘洋(20040300)。從相關案例探討智慧財產權與民法之關係。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,33(2),207-240。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.李素華(20040700)。智財權人拒絕授權構成優勢地位濫用--歐洲法院確立判斷標準。科技法律透析,16(7),11-16。  延伸查詢new window
4.李婉萍(20050300)。加拿大、日本關於著作權人不明或失聯時之法定授權制度介紹。科技法律透析,17(3),12-15。  延伸查詢new window
5.謝銘洋(20020300)。智慧財產授權契約之性質。月旦法學,82,24-25。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.林懿萱、莊庭瑞(2005)。現行著作權體制下的彈性授權模式:談Creative Commons。智慧財產權,76,28-45。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.陳淑美(2005)。我國著作權業務之現況與願景。智慧財產權,75(3),99-99。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.張永強、康勤、蔡東廷(2005)。從我國著作權法探討Creative Commons之應用與發展。科技法律透析,10-10。  延伸查詢new window
9.章忠信(1998)。獨樂樂,不如眾樂樂-音樂著作強制授權如何申請?。法律與你,54。  延伸查詢new window
10.李科逸(2005)。自由軟體國際間智財權重要爭訟及趨勢之淺析--著作權訴訟爭議漸息,專利權侵權疑慮頻生。智慧財產權,76,5。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.章忠信(2003)。著作權保護、科技發展與合理使用。0。23-23。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.蔡明誠(2003)。國際著作權仲介團體制度之研究。  延伸查詢new window
2.中央研究院資訊科學研究所(2005)。推廣著作權免費授權機制之研究。0。  延伸查詢new window
3.益思科技法律事務所(2002)。數位科技對著作權授權契約及合理使用範圍之影響之研究。  延伸查詢new window
4.益思科技法律事務所、賴文智(2005)。著作物重製設備補償金收取制度之研究。0。  延伸查詢new window
5.陳家駿(2004)。著作權科技保護措施之研究:研究報告。0。  延伸查詢new window
6.黃銘傑(2005)。日本著作權法現況與相關修正之研究。0。  延伸查詢new window
7.寰瀛法律事務所(2005)。著作權數位產業市場授權之研究。0。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Patry, William F.(1994)。Copyright Law and Practice。  new window
2.Lessig, Lawrence(2004)。Free Culture。Penguin Press。  new window
3.賀德芬(1994)。文化創新與商業契機:著作權法論文集。臺北:月旦出版公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.羅明通(200401)。著作權法論。台英國際商務法律事務所。  延伸查詢new window
5.藝立協(2003)。Blog:部落格線上出版、網路日誌實作。臺北市:上奇科技文化。  延伸查詢new window
6.盧文祥(1988)。司法革新與電腦科技互動關係之研究。司法革新與電腦科技互動關係之研究。沒有紀錄。  延伸查詢new window
7.Vaidhyanathan, Siva(2003)。著作權法的第一堂課。著作權法的第一堂課。0。  延伸查詢new window
8.Leaffer, Marshall(1989)。Understanding Copyright Law。Understanding Copyright Law。0。  new window
9.McCarthy, Thomas(1992)。Public Domain Is the Rule; Intellectual Property Is the Exception, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition。Public Domain Is the Rule; Intellectual Property Is the Exception, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition。0。  new window
其他
1.黃怡騰(200108)。著作之合理使用案例介紹,經濟部智慧財產局。,http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ch/AllinOne_Show.aspx?path=1208&guid=8bb89965-36c6-407c-9ba6-2e60d351bl48&lang=zh-tw, 2012/07/20。  延伸查詢new window
2.章忠信。找不到作者授權怎麼辦?,著作權筆記,0。  延伸查詢new window
3.章忠信(2003)。美國著作權局為解決孤兒著作之利用困境覓良方,http://dcipo.org.tw/upload/publish/2003/main.htm。  延伸查詢new window
4.Christiansen, Rod,Shugart, Steve,Meyer, Jeff。Breaking through the Barriers of Creativity: The History of Copyrights and Creative Commons,0。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE