本文選題：建筑作品 + 著作權(quán)�。� 參考：《廣東財經(jīng)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：建筑作品作為我國著作權(quán)法的客體經(jīng)歷了一個從無到有、不斷發(fā)展的歷程。我國于1990年制定第一部《著作權(quán)法》之時并未將建筑作品作為一個獨立客體納入著作權(quán)保護(hù),而是在2001年修訂現(xiàn)行《著作權(quán)法》時才將其與美術(shù)作品并列納入著作權(quán)的保護(hù)。隨著實務(wù)當(dāng)中建筑作品著作權(quán)糾紛的日益增多,現(xiàn)行法律已經(jīng)不能有效保護(hù)建筑作品著作權(quán)人的合法權(quán)益。本文從建筑作品的保護(hù)范圍、獨創(chuàng)性判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、侵權(quán)復(fù)制方式以及侵權(quán)救濟(jì)方式四個方面為切入點,結(jié)合國內(nèi)建筑作品的典型案例進(jìn)行深入分析,指出其存在的問題與不足,并參照國外相關(guān)的法律規(guī)定和司法實踐經(jīng)驗提出我國建筑作品在保護(hù)范圍、獨創(chuàng)性判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、侵權(quán)復(fù)制方式以及侵權(quán)救濟(jì)方式四個方面的完善建議。本文在運用著作權(quán)法基本原理的前提下對各問題的討論盡量按照建筑類設(shè)計圖紙、建筑模型、建筑物或構(gòu)筑物三者分別展開,這不僅有助于我們理解法學(xué)意義上對同一獨創(chuàng)性藝術(shù)美感所具有不同表達(dá)方式的保護(hù)意義,也符合建筑學(xué)意義上各作品的設(shè)計、制作、施工等建筑工藝流程。從法學(xué)和建筑學(xué)的交叉視角來進(jìn)行分析有助于我們理解建筑作品的應(yīng)然保護(hù)范圍;從各作品的制作工藝流程來分析有助于我們理解建筑類設(shè)計圖紙、建筑模型、建筑物或構(gòu)筑物三者的獨創(chuàng)性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是一個由高到低的漸變過程;從三者自身存在的維度出發(fā)我們可以更加清楚的理解對各作品的侵權(quán)復(fù)制方式;在完善三者的侵權(quán)救濟(jì)方式上本文并未將其分別開來進(jìn)行闡述,而是依然依據(jù)著作權(quán)法規(guī)定的賠禮道歉、消除影響等救濟(jì)方式對其綜合分析以保證對建筑作品權(quán)利人救濟(jì)的整體性、系統(tǒng)性。時值我國《著作權(quán)法》第三次修改之際,希望本文的論述能夠?qū)ㄖ髌分鳈?quán)保護(hù)有所裨益。
[Abstract]:As the object of copyright law, architectural works have experienced a process of development from scratch. When our country formulated the first copyright Law in 1990, it did not bring the building work into the copyright protection as an independent object, but brought it into the copyright protection only when the current copyright Law was revised in 2001. With the increasing disputes over the copyright of construction works in practice, the current law can no longer effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the copyright owners of construction works. In this paper, the scope of protection of architectural works, the criteria of originality, the way of tort reproduction and the way of tort relief are taken as the breakthrough point, and combined with the typical cases of domestic architectural works, the problems and shortcomings are pointed out. With reference to the relevant foreign laws and regulations and judicial practice experience, the author puts forward four perfect suggestions on the scope of protection, the criterion of originality, the way of tort reproduction and the way of tort remedy in our country. On the premise of applying the basic principles of copyright law, this paper tries to discuss various problems according to the architectural design drawings, building models, buildings or structures, respectively. This not only helps us to understand the legal sense of the same original artistic aesthetic sense of the protection of different expressions, but also in line with the architectural sense of the design, production, construction and other construction process. Analysis from the angle of law and architecture helps us to understand the scope of protection of architectural works, and from the production process of each work to help us understand architectural design drawings, architectural models, The originality standard of buildings or structures is a gradual process from high to low. In order to perfect the three ways of tort relief, this paper does not separate them from each other, but still apologizes according to the copyright law. The comprehensive analysis of relief means such as eliminating influence ensures the integrity and systematicness of relief to the right holders of architectural works. At the time of the third revision of China's copyright Law, it is hoped that the discussion in this paper will benefit the copyright protection of construction works.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣東財經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.41

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王鳳娟;劉振;;著作權(quán)法中思想與表達(dá)二分法之合并原則及其適用[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2017年01期

2 馬一德;;再現(xiàn)型攝影作品之著作權(quán)認(rèn)定[J];法學(xué)研究;2016年04期

3 王遷;;論建筑作品的表現(xiàn)形式[J];法商研究;2014年06期

4 焦和平;;“異體復(fù)制”的定性與復(fù)制權(quán)規(guī)定的完善——以我國《著作權(quán)法》第三次修改為契機(jī)[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2014年04期

5 王坤;;論作品的獨創(chuàng)性——以對作品概念的科學(xué)建構(gòu)為分析起點[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2014年04期

6 王遷;;論著作權(quán)法保護(hù)工業(yè)設(shè)計圖的界限——以英國《版權(quán)法》的變遷為視角[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2013年01期

7 朱理;;建筑作品著作權(quán)的侵權(quán)判定[J];法律適用;2010年07期

8 朱嘯飛;;建筑作品的法律特征及其保護(hù)條件[J];法治研究;2010年06期

9 盧海君;;美國的建筑作品版權(quán)制度及對我國的啟示[J];北方法學(xué);2010年02期

10 尹志強;;建筑作品的范圍及復(fù)制侵權(quán)的認(rèn)定[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2009年01期

，

本文編號：1795621