本文關(guān)鍵詞： 肖像 人格標(biāo)識(shí) 肖像權(quán) 商業(yè)化利用　出處：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：近些年,肖像的商業(yè)化權(quán)帶來(lái)了相當(dāng)?shù)慕?jīng)濟(jì)效益,因此成為理論界、實(shí)務(wù)界的熱門(mén)話題。肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)確實(shí)可以擴(kuò)大人民的財(cái)產(chǎn)收入來(lái)源,也增加了人民的財(cái)產(chǎn)性收入,所以從理論角度出發(fā),承認(rèn)肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán),并為其建立理念、構(gòu)筑制度顯得尤為重要。目前我國(guó)理論界主要的分歧點(diǎn)在于肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)的法律性質(zhì),主要分為兩種觀點(diǎn),以吳漢東先生為代表的學(xué)者主張肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)顯現(xiàn)的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益與財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)內(nèi)涵一致,是一種新型的財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán);而更多的學(xué)者支持肖像的商業(yè)化利用是人格權(quán)的一種自主控制與決定權(quán)能,其體現(xiàn)財(cái)產(chǎn)利益可為人格權(quán)所吸收,與肖像的人格利益相互影響、相互作用。人格權(quán)說(shuō)從人格權(quán)的人格展現(xiàn)與實(shí)現(xiàn)的本質(zhì)上說(shuō)明肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)是能被涵蓋在人格權(quán)中,更加透徹的闡述肖像的商業(yè)利用權(quán)的實(shí)質(zhì).兩種學(xué)說(shuō)相較之下,人格權(quán)說(shuō)更能說(shuō)明肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)法律性質(zhì)的本質(zhì)。在立法上,《民法通則》第一百條未明確肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益以及損害賠償?shù)倪m用,《侵權(quán)法》第二十條的理解與適用也存在不小的爭(zhēng)議。由此導(dǎo)致實(shí)務(wù)中出現(xiàn)同案不同判的情形如劉翔案,也出現(xiàn)適用主體不明確、對(duì)肖像轉(zhuǎn)讓與許可的裁判缺乏依據(jù)、不承認(rèn)肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán)可繼承性、損害賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一的情形。對(duì)此應(yīng)從以下幾個(gè)方面完善,主體方面,不應(yīng)將權(quán)利主體局限于名人,應(yīng)將權(quán)利的主體擴(kuò)展到普通民眾;轉(zhuǎn)讓與許可方面,明確肖像轉(zhuǎn)讓與許可合同中轉(zhuǎn)讓的是肖像權(quán)的權(quán)能,且未脫離肖像權(quán)人的控制,一旦侵害到肖像權(quán)人的精神利益,還可以此為由單方面解除使用合同。合同許可方式分為獨(dú)占許可合同與非獨(dú)占許可合同兩種;繼承方面,被繼承人死后,為保護(hù)被繼承人的人格利益以及被許可人既有利益,繼承人可繼承該種權(quán)利并作為管理者管理其肖像的商業(yè)化利用權(quán);權(quán)利限制方面,肖像的商業(yè)化利用要受到公序良俗和言論自由的限制;救濟(jì)方面,不應(yīng)只存在賠償實(shí)際損失一種賠償標(biāo)準(zhǔn),還應(yīng)包括返還所得利益與法院酌定賠償兩種標(biāo)準(zhǔn),而且在救濟(jì)方式上,除依據(jù)《侵權(quán)法》第二條規(guī)定要求侵害人承擔(dān)侵權(quán)責(zé)任外,還可以以不當(dāng)?shù)美驘o(wú)因管理為由,要求侵害人返還獲利所得。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the commercialization of portraits has brought considerable economic benefits, so it has become a hot topic in theory and practice. The commercial use of portraits can really expand the source of people's property income. It also increases the property income of the people, so from a theoretical point of view, recognition of the commercial use of portraits, and the establishment of ideas for it. It is very important to construct the system. At present, the main divergences in the theoretical circle of our country lie in the legal nature of the commercial utilization right of the portrait, which is mainly divided into two viewpoints. The scholars, represented by Mr. Wu Han-dong, advocate that the property interests of the commercial use of portraits are consistent with the connotation of the property rights, and it is a new type of property rights. More scholars support that the commercial use of portraits is a kind of independent control and decision-making power of personality rights, which reflects the property interests can be absorbed by the personality rights, and the personality interests of the portrait influence each other. The theory of personality rights shows that the commercial use of portraits can be covered in personality rights from the essence of personality display and realization of personality rights. Compared with the two theories, the personality right theory can explain the nature of the legal nature of the commercial use of the portrait more clearly. In legislation. Article 100th of the General principles of Civil Law does not clearly define the property interests of the commercial use of portraits and the application of compensation for damages. The interpretation and application of Article 20th of Tort Law is also controversial, which leads to different judgments of the same case in practice, such as Liu Xiang case, and the subject of application is not clear. The judgment on the transfer and licensing of portraits lacks the basis, does not recognize the commercial use of portraits can be inherited, damage compensation standards are different. This should be improved from the following aspects, the subject. The subject of rights should not be limited to celebrities, but should be extended to ordinary people. In the aspect of transfer and license, it is clear that the power of portrait right is transferred in the contract of portrait transfer and license, and it is not separated from the control of portrait right person, once infringing upon the spiritual interests of portrait right person. The contract license can be divided into exclusive license contract and non-exclusive license contract. In the aspect of inheritance, in order to protect the interests of the decedent and the licensee, the heirs can inherit the rights and manage the commercial use of their portraits as managers. In terms of rights restriction, the commercial use of portraits is restricted by public order, good customs and freedom of speech. In the aspect of relief, there should be not only one standard of compensation for the actual loss, but also two criteria for the return of the benefits of income and the discretionary compensation of the court, and in the way of relief. In addition to requiring the infringer to bear the tort liability in accordance with Article 2 of the Tort Law, the infringer may also be required to return the profit-making income on the grounds of improper enrichment or non-cause management.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王葉剛;;論人格權(quán)擅自商業(yè)化利用中的獲利賠償請(qǐng)求權(quán)[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2016年04期

2 冉克平;;肖像權(quán)上的財(cái)產(chǎn)利益及其救濟(jì)[J];清華法學(xué);2015年04期

3 王利明;;論民法總則不宜全面規(guī)定人格權(quán)制度——兼論人格權(quán)獨(dú)立成編[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2015年03期

4 陳傳法;;人格財(cái)產(chǎn)及其法律意義[J];法商研究;2015年02期

5 張善斌;;人格要素商業(yè)化利用的規(guī)制模式選擇及制度構(gòu)建[J];江漢論壇;2015年02期

6 劉召成;;人格商業(yè)化利用權(quán)的教義學(xué)構(gòu)造[J];清華法學(xué);2014年03期

7 張紅;;肖像權(quán)保護(hù)中的利益平衡[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2014年01期

8 王葉剛;;人格權(quán)中經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值法律保護(hù)模式探討[J];比較法研究;2014年01期

9 溫世揚(yáng);;析“人格權(quán)商品化”與“人格商品化權(quán)”[J];法學(xué)論壇;2013年05期

10 王利明;;論人格權(quán)商品化[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2013年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 宗菲;論人格標(biāo)識(shí)商業(yè)化利用的法律保護(hù)[D];廣東財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2016年

2 靳哲思;肖像合理使用制度研究[D];河北大學(xué);2015年

3 孟祥潤(rùn);肖像商業(yè)化利用的法律規(guī)制[D];西南政法大學(xué);2015年

4 郭禹紅;人格商業(yè)化利用的法律規(guī)制[D];浙江師范大學(xué);2013年

5 王舒怡;人格表征要素商品化的法律實(shí)證研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2013年

6 時(shí)長(zhǎng)茂;肖像權(quán)與藝術(shù)作品著作權(quán)的沖突與調(diào)和[D];蘭州大學(xué);2013年

7 屈麗娜;自然人形象的商業(yè)化利用[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

8 劉正民;論肖像權(quán)的民法保護(hù)[D];河南大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：1490799