【摘要】：公眾人物是指在生活中為人們廣泛知曉和關(guān)注的社會知名人士,因其自身行為能給社會帶來正面或負面影響的社會成員。如政府官員、影視明星、體育明星、著名科學(xué)家、文化藝術(shù)家、戰(zhàn)犯等。由于其在社會影響力、社會責(zé)任、財產(chǎn)屬性等方面的特殊性,在保護他們的名譽權(quán)和一般公民的名譽權(quán)時是具有一定區(qū)別的,其保護范圍就應(yīng)受到法律一定的限制。根據(jù)公眾人物的概念及其主要特點,可以將其作以下歸類：其按照公眾人物的主觀心理狀態(tài),可以分為自愿的公眾人物和非自愿的公眾人物；按照性質(zhì)可以將公眾人物分為政治公眾人物和社會公眾人物。目前從“范志毅訴東方體育報案”到“潘粵明名譽權(quán)糾紛案”,我國法院在審理侵犯公眾人物名譽權(quán)的案件時沒有專門的法律作為審判的依據(jù),會導(dǎo)致“同案不同判”現(xiàn)象的出現(xiàn)。而美國對于公眾人物名譽權(quán)的保護較為完善的法律依據(jù),從判例法到成文法,“薩利文案”開始出現(xiàn)的“公眾官員”到后來完善的“公眾人物”美國法律一直都在完善公眾人物名譽權(quán)的法律保護制度。此外,歐洲部分國家關(guān)于公眾人物名譽權(quán)的法律保護(英國依附侵權(quán)法體系實現(xiàn)對名譽權(quán)的間接保護,德國以人格尊嚴為核心的對名譽進行分領(lǐng)域保護),都能說明我國關(guān)于公眾人物名譽權(quán)的保護較國外還是不完善的。 本文認為,目前我國在公眾人物名譽權(quán)的保護上不完善主要包括以下幾點：對公眾人物的認定標準不明確、侵犯公眾人物名譽權(quán)沒有明確的民事法律責(zé)任的規(guī)定、有關(guān)公眾人物的訴訟制度不完善、沒有專門性適用公眾人物名譽權(quán)的法律規(guī)定。今后通過公眾人物名譽權(quán)制度的比較研究,對我國公眾人物名譽權(quán)制度的構(gòu)建提供幾點建議：明確界定公眾人物的認定標準、完善侵犯公眾人物名譽權(quán)的法律責(zé)任、規(guī)范保護公眾人物名譽權(quán)的訴訟制度、在人格權(quán)等相關(guān)法律法規(guī)中明確保護公眾人物名譽權(quán)的法律規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:The public figure is the social famous person who is widely known and concerned in the life, because its own behavior can bring the positive or the negative influence to the society member. Such as government officials, film and television stars, sports stars, famous scientists, cultural artists, war criminals and so on. Because of its particularity in social influence, social responsibility, property attribute and so on, it is different in protecting their reputation right and general citizen's right of reputation, and its scope of protection should be limited by law. According to the concept of public figure and its main characteristics, it can be classified as follows: according to the subjective psychological state of public figure, it can be divided into voluntary public figure and involuntary public figure; According to the nature of public figures can be divided into political public figures and social public figures. At present, from "Fan Zhiyi v. Oriental Sports report" to "Pan Yue-ming reputation dispute case", Chinese courts do not have a special law as a basis for trial when trying cases that infringe upon the reputation rights of public figures. This will lead to the appearance of different judgments in the same case. In the United States, the legal basis for the protection of the reputation of public figures is relatively perfect, ranging from case law to statutory law. From the beginning of the Sullivan case to the later perfection of American law, American law has been perfecting the legal protection system of public figure's right of reputation. In addition, in some European countries, the legal protection of the right of reputation of public figures (the United Kingdom relies on the tort law system to realize the indirect protection of the right of reputation, The protection of reputation in Germany, which takes human dignity as the core, can explain that the protection of reputation right of public figures in our country is not perfect compared with foreign countries. In this paper, the author thinks that the protection of reputation right of public figures in our country is not perfect at present, which mainly includes the following points: the identification standard of public figures is not clear, and there is no clear stipulation of civil legal liability for infringing public figures' reputation rights. The litigation system of public figures is not perfect, and there is no special legal regulation of public figures' right of reputation. In the future, through the comparative study of the system of reputation right of public figures, this paper provides several suggestions for the construction of the system of reputation right of public figures in our country: defining clearly the standards for the identification of public figures, perfecting the legal responsibility of infringing upon the reputation rights of public figures, Standardizing the litigation system of protecting public personage's right of reputation, making clear the legal provisions of protecting public personage's right of reputation in relevant laws and regulations such as personality right.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：海南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 張新寶;;我國人格權(quán)立法:體系、邊界和保護[J];法商研究;2012年01期

2 方濤;;論影視明星隱私權(quán)的法律保護[J];法制與社會;2014年21期

3 劉繼業(yè);;論名譽權(quán)保護視野之下的公眾人物[J];商業(yè)經(jīng)濟;2014年12期

，

本文編號：2281540