標題: 著作權侵害判斷模式之研究
A Study on the Elements of Copyright Infringement
作者: 林萱茹
Lin, Syuan-Ru
王敏銓
Wang, Min-Chiuan
科技法律研究所
關鍵字: 著作權侵害;接觸;實質相似;重製;抄襲;不當取用;明顯近似;整體觀念及感覺測試法;反覆測試法;模式測試法;一般觀眾;事實上近似性;Copyright Infringement;Access;Substantial Similarity;Copying;Improper Appropriation;Striking Similarity;Total Concept and Feel Test;Iterative Test;Pattern Test;Ordinary Observer;Probative Similarity
公開日期: 2013
摘要: 著作權侵害在傳統上面,因著作的類型眾多,而引發許多爭議。我國法院於判斷著作權侵害時多以接觸與實質相似判斷著作權侵害,惟如此判斷是否為正確之判斷模式有待商榷。且我國著作權法中並未規定著作權侵害如何判斷,僅規定著作權侵害之效果,故於著作權侵害判斷模式上面實有討論之必要。 本文整理美國學說與我國學說,並介紹我國早期最高法院判決中對於著作權侵害判斷引進美國實務判斷模式,自該判決作出後,我國法院於著作權侵害案件上多引該判決之判斷模式作為判決之基礎。輔以介紹美國期刊、學說上面,於我國較少探討之概念。再論述我國判決上面如何判斷著作權侵害,並進而分析我國於判斷上是否有值得肯定與需要改進之處。最後統計美國判決中自2008年6月至2013年5月著作權侵害判斷模式,並比較我國於2008年7月成立智慧財產法院後,我國判決對於著作權侵害判斷模式之統計資料,試圖從中尋找相同與相異之處。最後總結以上所討論之資料,以期供我國法院參考之。 我國判決於著作權侵害判斷模式上,各法院間對於判斷模式持有不同見解。以致於著作權侵害案件中,人民對於如何攻擊防禦有所疑慮,可能造成人民對於法院產生不信任感。本文嘗試以美國與我國學說、判決整理,以祈提供我國法院可供遵循之判斷模式,進而提升人民對於法院之信服度。
Traditionally, courts often face many difficulties and uncertainties when considering cases of copyright infringement due to the many types of works involved that can be copyright protected. The multi-faceted nature of copyrighted works is the source of many controversies and heated debates in among legal scholars and legal practitioners. In Taiwan, when the court is considering copyright infringement, it usually emphasizes heavily on two criteria: “access” and “substantial similarity” as the overall determining factors when the court is making judgment. However, whether just considering these two factors alone are legally sufficient and valid is a matter of much debate. Furthermore, Taiwan’s copyright act only stipulates the effect of copyright violation, it says little if any on how to determine copyright infringement. Consequently, it is very important to surmise a reliable procedure and essential factors involved in determining copyright infringement. In this thesis, the author will begin by categorizing and elaborating on some of the most influential legal theories behind what constitute as copyright infringement from both U.S. and Taiwan jurisprudence. Furthermore, the author will also provide a thorough introduction on some of the early Taiwan high court’s decisions on copyright infringement that had incorporated legal theories from America in their rationale. As the result of from these early judgments, many lower courts decisions also follow the legal reasoning and factors set forth in the high court’s decisions when making their own judgment on copyright infringement. Moreover, this paper will also incorporate some of the less discussed criteria and legal theories regarding copyright infringement in Taiwan from multiple sources such as law reviews and legal journals from U.S. From analyzing literatures from these sources, the author will attempt to put forth some suggestions and observations for Taiwan court to consider when making judgment on copyright infringements. This paper will analyze and perform statistical tests on cases of copyright infringement gathered from Intellectual Property court since its inception in July 2008. This result will be compared with judgments made in American courts and sorted by different legal reasoning and factors used by these courts when making their decisions. Comparatively in Taiwan, factors and procedure used in copyright infringement litigation are highly diverse among different courts. The diversity of judgment on similar issues is the source of uncertainty for the general public and undermines general public’s reliance to the legal system due to the unpredictability in court’s decision making process. Consequently, author will analyzes and categorizes legal theories and judgments from both courts in Taiwan and United States, in an attempt to propose a reliable procedure and a set factor to consider when making judgment in copyright infringement. Hopefully this paper will serve Taiwan’s courts by providing more reliable criteria and procedure to follow in the cases involving copyright infringement; while, serve the public’s interest by increasing reliability of court’s decision making process.
URI: http://140.113.39.130/cdrfb3/record/nctu/#GT079838504
http://hdl.handle.net/11536/72588
Appears in Collections:Thesis


Files in This Item:

  1. 850401.pdf