本文選題：知識產(chǎn)權(quán) + 表達自由　； 參考：《華中科技大學(xué)》2013年博士論文

【摘要】：信息（知識）社會的到來，知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的價值日益突顯，而要求信息（表達）自由的呼聲亦不絕于耳。由于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)制度存在以下悖論：即“沒有合法的壟斷就不會有足夠的信息被生產(chǎn)，但是，有了合法的壟斷又不會有太多的信息被使用”。由此，在某種程度上，知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與信息（表達）自由之間存在著無法克服的矛盾。 為了化解兩者之間存在的沖突，既保護知識產(chǎn)權(quán)，又使信息（表達）自由，學(xué)者們八仙過海，各顯神通，提出了各種協(xié)調(diào)兩者矛盾的措施，試圖調(diào)和其沖突。不過，學(xué)者們在討論知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由的關(guān)系時，多傾向于論述兩者之間存在的沖突，并建議從內(nèi)部或外部引入表達自由以限制知識產(chǎn)權(quán)，捍衛(wèi)社會公眾獲取、接受和傳播信息的自由。其理由大都認為表達自由是比知識產(chǎn)權(quán)更高位階的權(quán)利類型，在兩者發(fā)生沖突時，表達自由優(yōu)先。其實，知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由具有共同的社會環(huán)境，如它們都產(chǎn)生于資本主義社會；都以市場經(jīng)濟作為自己的經(jīng)濟基礎(chǔ)；都根源于市民社會。知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由具有共同的社會功能，兩者都屬于人權(quán)；都具有促進民主、繁榮文化、實現(xiàn)自我、促進社會變革的功能，以及知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由相互促進。所以，以表達自由直接抗辯知識產(chǎn)權(quán)并非理所當(dāng)然，因為這會導(dǎo)致以下消極后果：減損知識產(chǎn)權(quán)人的自治；剝奪知識產(chǎn)權(quán)人的財產(chǎn)利益；減弱知識產(chǎn)權(quán)制度對創(chuàng)造者的激勵；損害表達自由本身的價值。 當(dāng)然，勿容置疑的是，知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由之間存在矛盾或沖突，而化解兩者之間存在的沖突這也是本文要解決的重要課題。學(xué)界在討論知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由的解決之道時，大都比較宏觀，比如堅持知識產(chǎn)權(quán)工具論，或援引表達自由從外部抗辯知識產(chǎn)權(quán)。其實，這種宏大敘事在解決兩者沖突時過于抽象，在具體操作時往往陷入困境。換句話說，，這些論述并沒有使用表達自由的相關(guān)法理或司法原則，來解決表達自由與某種具體的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)之間的沖突。此種論述給我們的感覺是：知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由之間是“兩張皮”，而沒有使知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與表達自由交織在一起，本文則試圖解決以上問題。
[Abstract]:With the arrival of information (knowledge) society, the value of intellectual property rights is becoming more and more prominent, and the demand for freedom of information (expression) is always heard. Because of the paradox of intellectual property system, "without legal monopoly, there will not be enough information to be produced, but there will be legal monopoly and not too much information will be used". Thus, to some extent, there is an insurmountable contradiction between intellectual property and freedom of information. They put forward various measures to reconcile the contradiction between the two and try to reconcile their conflicts. However, when discussing the relationship between intellectual property rights and freedom of expression, scholars tend to discuss the conflict between the two and recommend the introduction of freedom of expression, both internally and externally, to limit intellectual property rights and defend public access to them. Freedom to receive and impart information Most of the reasons are that freedom of expression is a higher right type than intellectual property, and freedom of expression takes precedence in the event of conflict between the two. In fact, intellectual property rights and freedom of expression have the same social environment, for example, they are both born in capitalist society; they all take market economy as their own economic base; they are both rooted in civil society. Intellectual property rights and freedom of expression have the same social function, both belong to human rights, both have the function of promoting democracy, prospering culture, realizing self, promoting social change, and the mutual promotion of intellectual property rights and freedom of expression. Therefore, it is not a matter of course to defend intellectual property directly with freedom of expression, as this will lead to the following negative consequences: derogating from the autonomy of the intellectual property owner; depriving the intellectual property owner of the property interests; weakening the incentive of the intellectual property system to the creator; Of course, there are contradictions or conflicts between intellectual property rights and freedom of expression, and resolving the conflicts between them is an important issue to be solved in this paper. When discussing the solution of intellectual property right and freedom of expression, the academic circles are mostly macro, such as insisting on intellectual property tool theory, or invoking freedom of expression to defend intellectual property from outside. In fact, this kind of grand narrative is too abstract to solve the conflict between the two, and often gets into a dilemma in concrete operation. In other words, these statements do not use the relevant legal or judicial principles of freedom of expression to resolve the conflict between freedom of expression and a specific intellectual property right. This argument gives us the feeling that there are "two skins" between intellectual property and freedom of expression, without intertwining intellectual property and freedom of expression. This paper attempts to solve the above problems.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D913


本文編號：2006948