標題: 著作權損害賠償之探討—以美國及台灣法制為中心
A Study on Compensation of Copyright Infringement— Focus on the Legal Systems of U.S. and Taiwan
作者: 陳凱君
Chen, Kai-Chun
王敏銓
Wang, Min-Chiuan
管理學院科技法律學程
關鍵字: 著作權;損害賠償;Copyright;Compensation;Infringement
公開日期: 2009
摘要: 著作權損害賠償之探討 —以美國及台灣法制為中心 學生:陳凱君 指導教授:王敏銓博士 國立交通大學 管理學院碩士在職專班科技法律組 摘要       智慧財產權遭到侵害時,一如其他有體財產權一樣,智慧財產權人得請求損害賠償及請求排除侵害。就排除侵害而言,固較少疑問,但就損害賠償而言,智慧財產權的侵害究應負何等損害賠償責任?損害又應如何計算、其賠償額又應如何核定才不失公平合理?在現今智慧財產意識高張、智慧財產權常被企業用來作為削弱競爭者的競爭力、擴張自身企業版圖的科技世界□,益形顯得重要。 依本國最高法院判例所揭示之損害賠償原理,侵權行為賠償損害之請求權,乃在填補被害人之實際損害,而非更予以利益,故損害賠償以受有實際損害為成立要件,若無損害亦絕無賠償之可言,因此,在損害賠償制度中,即須先確認被侵權人所受之損害若干,才能據以決定侵權行為人應負之賠償責任範圍,且並未以懲罰侵權人為其立法目的,因此,在嚴格的證據下,被侵權人如沒有充足的證據證明其損害,則只能望天空嘆、徒呼負負了。 但其他國家之立法例是否亦是如此?如果不是的話,該國之立法例又是如何?實務又是如何運作?舉美國著作權法之見解及實例發現,該國對損害額之認定較之本國有較為彈性的認定原則,且並非以填補被侵權人的損害為唯一目的,尚兼及懲罰侵權人為其立法目的, 本文爰就司法院網站智慧財產法院成立以來,即民國97年7月1日起,至99年6月14日之判決中,以關鍵字「著作權」及「88條」進行搜索,找到61個判決,以之作為統計及研究之依據,以與美國著作權法及其實務見解作為比較及探討,以對著作權侵害事件之損害額之認定及賠償額之計算提出問題及建議,期使本國著作權法之保護及訴訟實務更臻健全。
A Study on Compensation of Copyright Infringement— Focus on the Legal Systems of U.S. and Taiwan student:Kai-Chun Chen Advisors:Dr. Min-Chiuan Wang Institute of Technology Law College of Management National Chiao Tung University ABSTRACT As owners of other properties, the owners of intellectual properties are entitled to claim damages and request the infringer to eliminate infringement from his/her intellectual properties. In the intellectual property infringement lawsuit, it might be clearer for requesting eliminating infringement from the intellectual property, but how to determine a fair compensation will be more difficult and complicated. However, it is very important in the current high-tech age. Under the damage compensation principle adopted by the Taiwan courts, torts compensation is only for filling the damage of the injured damage instead of granting the compensation more than the injured party’s damage. Therefore, if there is no damage, there would be no compensation. As such, the injured party has to prove his/her damage. If the injured party fails to present sufficient proof, his/her damage would not be compensated. However, not every jurisdiction adopts the same compensation principle. For example, the U.S. courts’ compensation principle is more flexible to also punish the infringer not only fill the injured party’s damage. The writer has compared sixty one judgments of the Taiwan Intellectual Property Court from July 1, 2008 to June 14, 2010 relating to the words of “copyrights” and “Article 88” with the judgments of U.S. Courts and wish to provide some thoughts and suggest for Taiwan courts to improve our practice by this thesis.
URI: http://140.113.39.130/cdrfb3/record/nctu/#GT079268508
http://hdl.handle.net/11536/40468
Appears in Collections:Thesis


Files in This Item:

  1. 850801.pdf