發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-04 01:24

  本文選題：肖像權(quán) + 財(cái)產(chǎn)利益��； 參考：《河南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：根據(jù)傳統(tǒng)民法理論，肖像權(quán)屬于人格權(quán)，具有專屬性、不可轉(zhuǎn)讓性和不可繼承性，然而這一傳統(tǒng)理論正面臨著現(xiàn)代“肖像權(quán)商業(yè)化利用”現(xiàn)象的挑戰(zhàn)。對肖像的商業(yè)化利用，使得肖像權(quán)由原來的防御權(quán)逐漸發(fā)展成為一種利用權(quán)，肖像權(quán)顯現(xiàn)出財(cái)產(chǎn)價(jià)值。隨著市場經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展和大眾傳媒的普及，一方面，，自然人尤其是名人將自己的肖像授權(quán)他人進(jìn)行商業(yè)使用（包括自然人死亡后，其合法繼承人將死者肖像授權(quán)他人商業(yè)使用），以獲得經(jīng)濟(jì)利益；另一方面，在司法實(shí)務(wù)中未經(jīng)許可而擅自使用他人（包括死者）的肖像用于商業(yè)目的的案件也在不斷增多�，F(xiàn)實(shí)生活中大多數(shù)侵犯肖像權(quán)的案件與商業(yè)目的相關(guān)，因此，本文的研究范圍就限定在肖像權(quán)商業(yè)化使用過程中產(chǎn)生的相關(guān)法律問題。 我國法院在審理肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的案件時(shí)，從案件的定性到損害賠償?shù)挠?jì)算，在法律適用中存在以下四個(gè)方面的問題：第一，對是否承認(rèn)和保護(hù)肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的態(tài)度不一：大部分法院不承認(rèn)，少數(shù)法院承認(rèn)，還有部分法院未作表態(tài)；第二，在對肖像權(quán)人進(jìn)行賠償時(shí)，過分倚重精神損害賠償，而忽略了財(cái)產(chǎn)損害賠償；第三，在承認(rèn)肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的判決中，確定財(cái)產(chǎn)損害賠償?shù)姆梢罁?jù)和計(jì)算標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不統(tǒng)一；第四，對死者肖像財(cái)產(chǎn)利益是否可以繼承的態(tài)度迥異。同樣的案件不同的法院會(huì)出現(xiàn)不同的審判結(jié)果。之所以出現(xiàn)上述問題，其原因在于：首先，我國《民法通則》及司法解釋未承認(rèn)肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益；其次，《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》第20條對“財(cái)產(chǎn)損失”的界定不明確，在計(jì)算損失時(shí)缺乏可操作性；再次，現(xiàn)行立法對死者肖像財(cái)產(chǎn)利益是否可以繼承缺乏規(guī)定，導(dǎo)致對死者肖像財(cái)產(chǎn)利益保護(hù)不足；最后，我國學(xué)界對肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的法律屬性界定不清，一部分學(xué)者采人格權(quán)理論，另一部分學(xué)者采財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)理論，在理論研究上仍舊存在爭議。 在面對侵害肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益案件時(shí)要正確適用法律，就應(yīng)當(dāng)明確肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的法律屬性。與一般的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益、肖像權(quán)精神利益相比，肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益具有很強(qiáng)的人格依附性，它是肖像權(quán)精神利益派生的利益，并非肖像權(quán)的主要內(nèi)容，并且它具有地域性、不穩(wěn)定性、可反復(fù)使用性的特點(diǎn)；另外，肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益在一定程度上可以與肖像權(quán)人相分離，可以通過肖像權(quán)授權(quán)許可使用合同或繼承等方式來實(shí)現(xiàn)；未經(jīng)許可而商業(yè)利用他人肖像的行為，可能會(huì)同時(shí)侵害肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益和肖像權(quán)精神利益。在對學(xué)界關(guān)于肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的法律性質(zhì)的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行整合后，筆者對其進(jìn)行了界定，采納“肖像權(quán)權(quán)能擴(kuò)張說”，主張將肖像權(quán)的權(quán)能進(jìn)行擴(kuò)張使其包含使用權(quán)能，這就決定了肖像權(quán)的內(nèi)容中包含精神利益和財(cái)產(chǎn)利益兩部分。通過對國外肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益法律適用的現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行分析，主要有德國和美國兩種保護(hù)模式。德國法的一元權(quán)利模式是通過擴(kuò)張既有的法律概念來保護(hù)新的利益，將肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)問題納入人格權(quán)框架內(nèi)解決，這是對人格權(quán)利益的發(fā)展。美國法的公開權(quán)模式是對精神利益和財(cái)產(chǎn)利益明確劃分為基礎(chǔ)，由隱私權(quán)保護(hù)肖像權(quán)精神利益，不得轉(zhuǎn)讓和繼承；由公開權(quán)保護(hù)肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益，允許轉(zhuǎn)讓和繼承。 借鑒德國和美國兩國的法律適用模式中各自的特點(diǎn)，筆者提出完善我國在肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益法律適用的建議：第一，應(yīng)當(dāng)明確肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益可以通過肖像權(quán)許可使用合同進(jìn)行轉(zhuǎn)讓，該合同具有準(zhǔn)物權(quán)效力，可以設(shè)立對抗第三人商業(yè)化利用的使用權(quán)；第二，將《民法通則》第100條中“以營利為目的”定位為確定肖像權(quán)損害賠償數(shù)額的依據(jù)，而非肖像權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任的構(gòu)成要件；第三，將《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》第20條中的“財(cái)產(chǎn)損失”進(jìn)行擴(kuò)大解釋使其包含肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的損失，并且完善財(cái)產(chǎn)損害賠償額的計(jì)算方法，賦予肖像權(quán)人選擇權(quán)；第四，將財(cái)產(chǎn)損害賠償作為侵害肖像權(quán)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的首要的救濟(jì)手段，同時(shí)發(fā)揮精神損害賠償?shù)恼{(diào)節(jié)功能，以平衡兩者的適用；第五，將權(quán)益侵害型不當(dāng)?shù)美{入《民法通則》第92條的適用范圍，以充分保護(hù)肖像權(quán)人的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益；第六，繼承法應(yīng)明確區(qū)分死者肖像的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益和精神利益，規(guī)定死者肖像財(cái)產(chǎn)利益可以繼承，并且確定其保護(hù)期限為死者死后50年。
[Abstract]:According to the traditional civil law theory, the right of portrait belongs to the right of personality, which has special property, non transferability and uninheritability. However, this traditional theory is facing the challenge of the commercialized use of the right of portrait. The commercial utilization of portraits makes the right of portrait develop from the original defense right gradually to a kind of use right, the right of portrait is obvious. With the development of the market economy and the popularity of the mass media, on the one hand, the natural people, especially the celebrities, have empowered others to carry out commercial use (including the death of natural persons, the legal heirs authorizing the portraits of the deceased to authorize the commercial use of others) to gain economic benefits; on the other hand, in judicial practice, it has not been used in judicial practice. The license and the unauthorized use of others (including the deceased) is also increasing in commercial purposes. In real life, most of the cases of violation of portraits are related to commercial purposes. Therefore, the scope of this study is limited to the relevant legal issues arising from the commercialized use of the right to portrait.
In the case of hearing the interests of the portrait right and property in our country, there are four problems in the application of the law from the nature of the case to the calculation of the compensation for damages. First, there are different attitudes to the recognition and protection of the interests of the portrait right and property: Most courts do not admit it, a few courts admit it, and some courts have not made a statement; Second, in the compensation of the portraiture, the excessive reliance on spiritual damage compensation, and the neglect of the compensation for property damage; third, in the recognition of the interests of the portrait right and property, to determine the legal basis of property damage compensation is not unified; fourth, the deceased portrait property interests can inherit the same attitude. The reasons for this problem are: first, the general rules of the civil law and the judicial interpretation do not recognize the interests of the portrait right and property; secondly, the twentieth article of the tort liability law is not clear about the definition of "property loss", and the lack of maneuverability in calculating the loss; and again, the present The legislation on the interest of the deceased's portrait property can not be inherited, which leads to the lack of protection of the interests of the deceased's portrait property; finally, the legal attributes of the interests of the portraits and property are not clearly defined by the academic circles in our country, and some scholars have adopted the theory of personality right, and the other part of the scholars' theory of property rights is still controversial in the theoretical study.
In the face of the right to apply the law when dealing with the property interests of the portrait right, it should be clear that the legal property of the property interests of the portrait right should be clearly defined. Compared with the general property interests and the spiritual interests of the portrait right, the interest of the portrait right and property has a strong personality attachment, which is the benefit derived from the spiritual interests of the portrait right, and is not the main content of the portrait right. And it has the characteristics of regionalism, instability and reusability; in addition, the interests of the portrait right and property can be separated from the portraiture to a certain extent, and can be realized by means of contract or inheritance by authorizing permission of the right of portrait; the act of commercial use of the portrait of others without permission may infringe the portrait right at the same time. After the integration of the legal nature of the interests of portrait right and property in the academic circles, the author defines it, adopts the "right of portrait right and power expansion", and advocates the expansion of the power of the right of portrait to include the use of power, which determines the spiritual interests of the right of portrait. The two part of the property interests. Through the analysis of the present situation of the legal application of the property interests of the right and property in foreign countries, there are two modes of protection in Germany and the United States. The one mode of the German law is to protect the new interests through the expansion of the existing legal concepts, and to bring the protection of the interests of the portrait right and property into the framework of the personality right. It is the development of the interests of the right of personality. The mode of public right of the American law is based on the clear division of the spiritual interests and property interests, and the right of privacy protects the spiritual interests of the portrait right, and can not be transferred and inherited; the right to publicity protects the interests of the portraits and property, allowing the transfer and inheritance.
Drawing on the respective characteristics of the legal application mode of Germany and the United States, the author puts forward some suggestions to improve the legal application of the property interests of the portrait right in China. First, it should be clear that the interests of the portrait right and property can be transferred through the license of the portrait right, which has the validity of quasi real right and can set up the commercialization of third persons. The use of the right to use; second, the "general rules" of the "general rules" of the 100th "for the purpose of profit" as the basis for determining the amount of compensation for the right to the right of portrait, and not the constitutive requirements of the right of infringement of the right of portrait; third, to expand the interpretation of the "property loss" in the law of tort and twentieth to include the loss of the interests of the portrait right and property, And improve the calculation method of the compensation amount of property damage, give the right to choose the right of portraits. Fourth, make the property damage compensation as the primary remedy for the benefit of the right and property of the portrait right and property, and give play to the regulating function of the compensation for the mental damage, in order to balance the application of the two. Fifth, bring the infringement of rights and interests into the general rule of the civil law ninth. The scope of application of the 2 is to fully protect the interests of the portraits of the portraits. Sixth, the inheritance law should clearly distinguish the property interests and spiritual interests of the portraits of the deceased, stipulate that the interests of the deceased's portrait and property can be inherited and the duration of its protection is 50 years after the death of the deceased.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 王澤鑒;;人格權(quán)保護(hù)的課題與展望——人格權(quán)的性質(zhì)及構(gòu)造:精神利益與財(cái)產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)[J];人大法律評論;2009年01期

本文編號：1975185