本文選題：體育比賽 + 著作權(quán)保護(hù)之批判��； 參考：《知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)》2017年05期

【摘要】：體育競(jìng)賽不能作為著作權(quán)法中的"作品"來保護(hù),因?yàn)槠洳环献髌返臉?gòu)成要件,同時(shí)用著作權(quán)予以保護(hù)還嚴(yán)重違背體育競(jìng)技的基本精神。但"表演者權(quán)"制度可以用來保護(hù)競(jìng)技者,這既符合著作權(quán)的基本法理,又與體育比賽的競(jìng)技精神不謀而合,同時(shí)還有利于解釋"體育賽事轉(zhuǎn)播權(quán)"的法權(quán)來源,因此該做法可謂"一石多鳥",殊值我國(guó)立法和司法理論加以借鑒和運(yùn)用。
[Abstract]:Sports competition can not be protected as a "work" in copyright law because it does not accord with the constitutive requirements of a work. At the same time, it also violates the basic spirit of sports competition seriously by using copyright to protect it. However, the system of "performer's right" can be used to protect athletes, which not only accords with the basic legal principle of copyright, but also coincides with the competitive spirit of sports competition, and also helps to explain the source of the legal right of "broadcasting right of sports events". Therefore, this practice can be described as "more birds with one stone", especially our legislation and judicial theory to draw lessons from and use it.
【作者單位】： 西南政法大學(xué);廣東東莞市第二人民法院;
【基金】：西南政法大學(xué)校級(jí)科研項(xiàng)目《體育賽事轉(zhuǎn)播的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法律問題研究》(編號(hào)為:2016XZQN-05)的階段性成果
【分類號(hào)】：D923.41

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 戴建庭;未成年人在體育競(jìng)賽中受到傷害誰(shuí)該擔(dān)責(zé)?[J];小學(xué)生時(shí)代;2004年04期

2 ;[J];;年期

，

本文編號(hào)：1846342