【摘要】：由于網(wǎng)絡(luò)信息環(huán)境的特殊性,網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)的維護(hù)也固有其獨(dú)特性。數(shù)字化環(huán)境下,網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)的技術(shù)措施保護(hù)已成為司法實(shí)踐和理論研究的重點(diǎn)問題之一,由技術(shù)措施而產(chǎn)生的規(guī)避與反規(guī)避的一系列問題也浮出水面。這就要求各國(guó)采取相應(yīng)的版權(quán)立法去平衡版權(quán)人及相關(guān)權(quán)利人與社會(huì)公眾利用網(wǎng)絡(luò)信息之間的利益。本文通過對(duì)中美網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)技術(shù)措施保護(hù)的比較研究,分析得出我國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)技術(shù)措施保護(hù)層面與美國(guó)存在的差距,以及我國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)保護(hù)存在的亟待解決的問題。全文共分五個(gè)部分對(duì)中美網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)技術(shù)措施保護(hù)展開論述: 第一部分為技術(shù)措施的概述。首先,通過對(duì)中美兩國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)界和法律界對(duì)技術(shù)措施不同定義的研究,歸納出了技術(shù)措施的基本定義,其次,介紹了技術(shù)措施的分類情況。然后論述了技術(shù)措施的構(gòu)成要件。接著重點(diǎn)分析了技術(shù)措施保護(hù)所面對(duì)的困境,即如何協(xié)調(diào)各方之間的利益平衡。 第二部分為技術(shù)措施權(quán)的比較分析。該部分首先系統(tǒng)的介紹了技術(shù)措施的主體、客體。然后,比較分析了中美技術(shù)措施權(quán)的內(nèi)容。 第三部分為中美技術(shù)措施的限制比較分析。依次介紹了中國(guó)在《信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)保護(hù)條例》中列舉的四大類技術(shù)措施規(guī)避的免責(zé)情況,美國(guó)在《數(shù)字千年版權(quán)法》中對(duì)技術(shù)措施規(guī)避例外的7大類規(guī)定,美國(guó)新近第四次關(guān)于免責(zé)數(shù)字產(chǎn)品的公告內(nèi)容。通過對(duì)比分析,提煉得出我國(guó)在此領(lǐng)域內(nèi)需要改進(jìn)的地方。 第四部分為中美技術(shù)措施規(guī)避責(zé)任的比較分析。規(guī)避責(zé)任分兩種情況:一是直接規(guī)避技術(shù)措施的責(zé)任承擔(dān);二是幫助規(guī)避技術(shù)措施的責(zé)任問題。美國(guó)對(duì)此兩方面的規(guī)避責(zé)任都有法律規(guī)定,而我國(guó)主要是針對(duì)直接規(guī)避行為。本文認(rèn)為,我國(guó)版權(quán)領(lǐng)域內(nèi),為規(guī)避技術(shù)措施提供幫助的行為應(yīng)該按照一般的違法責(zé)任予以追究,否則會(huì)片面增加版權(quán)人尋求版權(quán)法律保護(hù)的成本。 第五部分為對(duì)我國(guó)技術(shù)措施保護(hù)的啟示。通過對(duì)中美網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)技術(shù)措施各方面的比較分析,提出了完善我國(guó)技術(shù)措施保護(hù)的建議。
[Abstract]:Because of the particularity of network information environment, the maintenance of network copyright is also inherent in its uniqueness. In the digital environment, the protection of network copyright has become one of the key issues in judicial practice and theoretical research, and a series of problems of circumvention and anti-circumvention arising from technical measures have also emerged. This requires countries to adopt corresponding copyright legislation to balance the interests of copyright owners and relevant rights holders and the public in the use of network information. Based on the comparative study of network copyright measures between China and the United States, this paper analyzes the gap between China's network copyright technology measures and the United States, and the problems to be solved in our country's network copyright protection. The thesis is divided into five parts: the first part is the summary of technical measures. Firstly, by studying the different definitions of technical measures in the academic and legal circles of China and the United States, the basic definitions of technical measures are summed up, and the classification of technical measures is introduced. Then it discusses the composing elements of technical measures. Then it analyzes the dilemma of technical protection, that is, how to balance the interests of all parties. The second part is the comparative analysis of the right of technical measures. In this part, the subject and object of technical measures are introduced systematically. Then, the contents of the right of technical measures between China and the United States are compared and analyzed. The third part is the comparative analysis of technical measures between China and the United States. In turn, this paper introduces the exemption cases of four categories of technical measures evasion listed in China's regulations on the Protection of Information Network Transmission right. The United States in the Digital Millennium copyright Law provides seven major categories of technical measures to circumvent exceptions. The United States for the fourth time recently on the release of digital products announcement content. Through comparative analysis, we can find out the areas that need to be improved in our country. The fourth part is the comparative analysis of Chinese and American technical measures to avoid responsibility. There are two situations of evading responsibility: one is to bear the responsibility of circumventing technical measures directly; the other is to help circumvent the responsibility of technical measures. The United States has legal provisions on both aspects of evading responsibility, while our country mainly aims at direct circumvention. This paper holds that in the field of copyright in our country, the behavior of providing assistance for circumventing technical measures should be investigated according to the general liability of violating the law, otherwise, the cost of seeking the legal protection of copyright by copyright owners will be increased one-sidedly. The fifth part is the enlightenment to our country's technical measure protection. Based on the comparative analysis of Chinese and American network copyright technical measures, the paper puts forward some suggestions for perfecting the protection of China's technological measures.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D923.41;D971.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 彭玉勇;;著作權(quán)保護(hù)的現(xiàn)代發(fā)展趨勢(shì)與反壟斷措施[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年02期

2 王遷;朱健;;技術(shù)措施的“有效性”標(biāo)準(zhǔn)——評(píng)芬蘭DVD—CSS技術(shù)措施保護(hù)案[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年09期

3 黃武雙;李進(jìn)付;;再評(píng)北京精雕訴上海奈凱計(jì)算機(jī)軟件侵權(quán)案——兼論軟件技術(shù)保護(hù)措施與反向工程的合理緯度[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年10期

4 王遷;論版權(quán)法中的間接責(zé)任[J];科技與法律;2005年02期

5 李丕賦;吳雅峰;;尋求利益的平衡點(diǎn)——著作權(quán)法上技術(shù)措施認(rèn)定的法律研究[J];科技與法律;2008年06期

6 賀羽,宋亞蘭;美國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)技術(shù)措施保護(hù)的價(jià)值取向分析[J];樂山師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年06期

7 徐聰穎;控制訪問技術(shù)措施的法律保護(hù)[J];前沿;2004年07期

8 李揚(yáng);試論技術(shù)措施權(quán)[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年03期

9 王遷;美國(guó)保護(hù)技術(shù)措施的司法實(shí)踐和立法評(píng)介[J];西北大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2000年01期

10 張耕;略論版權(quán)的技術(shù)保護(hù)措施[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2004年02期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 梁志文;[N];人民法院報(bào);2002年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 徐進(jìn);論版權(quán)的技術(shù)保護(hù)措施[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2164793