本文選題：人格特征商業(yè)利用 + 隱私權(quán)　； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2013年博士論文

【摘要】：人格特征一詞是對自然人具有可識別性的外在形象的概括，人格特征商業(yè)利用則是為了增加經(jīng)濟(jì)利益以自然人人格特征宣傳或助銷產(chǎn)品。雖然人格特征商業(yè)利用是圍繞人格特征之財產(chǎn)價值展開，但不乏在商業(yè)利用過程中侵害人格利益的情形，更何況這種財產(chǎn)價值本身因?yàn)榕c人格特征相連而難以割舍其與人格利益的關(guān)系。因此本文選取人格利益與財產(chǎn)利益的雙重視角檢討人格特征商業(yè)利用問題。人格特征上承載的財產(chǎn)利益由于其介于傳統(tǒng)人格權(quán)與財產(chǎn)權(quán)中間地帶的特殊地位而成為民法學(xué)研究新問題，也因此成為本文研究的重心。但人格特征上的人格利益對我們加深人格特征財產(chǎn)利益的認(rèn)識并選擇合理保護(hù)路徑是必不可少的。本文圍繞人格特征商業(yè)利用問題，以提出問題、解決的邏輯線索貫穿全文，以比較研究方法為主軸，在探求答案的過程中努力加深對人格特征上人格利益和財產(chǎn)利益的認(rèn)識，并為現(xiàn)行制度提出完善建議，尤其是對人格特征財產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)提供法律基礎(chǔ)。 全文除引言和結(jié)語外共設(shè)七章，分為三個部分。第一部分（第一章和第二章）是基礎(chǔ)性研究，包括人格特征商業(yè)利用基礎(chǔ)性問題和人格特征財產(chǎn)利益保護(hù)的正當(dāng)化理由；第二部分（第三章、第四章和第五章）是比較研究部分，圍繞不正當(dāng)競爭模式、隱私權(quán)和公開權(quán)模式、一般人格權(quán)模式展開；第三部分（第六章和第七章）是在比較研究的基礎(chǔ)上認(rèn)識人格特征商業(yè)利用問題在我國的現(xiàn)狀并提出解決路徑。 第一章，人格特征商業(yè)利用基礎(chǔ)性問題。本章是鑒于目前國內(nèi)對人格特征商業(yè)利用法律現(xiàn)象的基本認(rèn)識缺乏共識的理論研究現(xiàn)狀，從術(shù)語選擇、概念界定、類型化分析及涉及的基本法律問題等方面所做的努力，也是全文研究的基點(diǎn)。首先，從普遍存在的“代言”與“被代言”的社會現(xiàn)象入手，整理比較國內(nèi)學(xué)者對這一現(xiàn)象的若干種術(shù)語選擇，運(yùn)用語義解釋方法對其逐一認(rèn)識并綜合法律現(xiàn)象的本質(zhì)，選擇“人格特征商業(yè)利用”這一術(shù)語。其次，在對“人格特征”、“商業(yè)利用”以及“人格特征商業(yè)利用”從內(nèi)涵和外延加以認(rèn)識的基礎(chǔ)上，重點(diǎn)對人格特征商業(yè)利用做了三種類型化分析。人格特征商業(yè)利用即將自然人具有可識別性的個體性標(biāo)志用作產(chǎn)品或服務(wù)的宣傳或推廣。本文選取以下三種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行類型化分析：1、以利用形式為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，人格特征商業(yè)利用包括體現(xiàn)自然人對產(chǎn)品有支持或推薦態(tài)度的支持性利用和單純地提及自然人人格特征的非支持性利用；2、以對人格特征的利用是否依人格特征權(quán)利人意志進(jìn)行為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，可以分為獲得其許可的授權(quán)利用和未經(jīng)其同意的擅自利用。3、另一種并不夠周延但非常有助于對人格特征商業(yè)利用本質(zhì)認(rèn)識的分類是根據(jù)所涉及利益的性質(zhì)將人格特征商業(yè)利用分為：（1）同時侵害人格特征所有人的財產(chǎn)利益與人格利益的商業(yè)利用。（2）只侵害財產(chǎn)利益的商業(yè)利用。（3）只涉及精神利益侵害的人格特征商業(yè)利用。再次，筆者對人格特征商業(yè)利用涉及的利益——人格利益和財產(chǎn)利益進(jìn)行了一般性理解和針對人格特征商業(yè)利用問題的具體理解。最后，對人格特征商業(yè)利用涉及的基本法律問題進(jìn)行梳理。本文欲研究的基本法律問題即人格特征商業(yè)利用中所涉及人格利益與財產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)問題。其中財產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)是重點(diǎn)和難點(diǎn)，但人格利益保護(hù)的論述也非不重要。 第二章，人格特征財產(chǎn)利益保護(hù)的正當(dāng)化理由。本章是在第一章的基礎(chǔ)上就人格特征財產(chǎn)利益保護(hù)的基礎(chǔ)性問題——正當(dāng)化理由做前置性的介紹。勞動理論、分配效率論、康德財產(chǎn)理論、人格自治理論是目前學(xué)術(shù)研究中被重點(diǎn)提及的正當(dāng)化理由。1、勞動理論。勞動價值論、防止不當(dāng)?shù)美摗⒔?jīng)濟(jì)刺激論均源自洛克勞動理論。除了勞動價值論是從內(nèi)部論證人格特征財產(chǎn)利益之合理性以外，其他學(xué)說均是從外部需求（社會需要）的角度予以論證。前者說明的是這一財產(chǎn)利益本就由我創(chuàng)造，應(yīng)該屬于我；后者體現(xiàn)的思想是人格特征上財產(chǎn)利益是怎么來的在所不問，既然存在這樣一種利益，那么出于社會整體利益考量，將這種利益歸屬于人格特征所有人。以洛克勞動理論為基礎(chǔ)的不當(dāng)?shù)美摗趧觾r值論和經(jīng)濟(jì)刺激論，均或多或少地將人格特征財產(chǎn)利益的正當(dāng)性基礎(chǔ)聚焦在勞動上。不當(dāng)?shù)美摲疵鎻?qiáng)調(diào)未付出勞動者不得享受權(quán)利；勞動價值論正面強(qiáng)調(diào)付出勞動者應(yīng)當(dāng)享受權(quán)利；經(jīng)濟(jì)刺激論則出于增加社會財富的考慮強(qiáng)調(diào)以權(quán)利刺激權(quán)利人更積極地勞動。它們都高估了個人在人格特征經(jīng)濟(jì)價值產(chǎn)生中的角色，都給以此為基礎(chǔ)建立的制度造成諸多困境。2、分配效率論雖然不再依賴洛克勞動理論，但其弱點(diǎn)與經(jīng)濟(jì)刺激論很相似，首先在人格特征的非對抗性和不可耗竭性這一前提性問題上則不能給出令人信服的解答。3、康德財產(chǎn)理論和人格自治理論的共同之處在于都將人格特征上的財產(chǎn)利益與人格利益聯(lián)系起來考慮�？档仑敭a(chǎn)理論中財產(chǎn)與自由、人格相連，人格自治理論中財產(chǎn)利益與自治的自我界定利益相連。康德財產(chǎn)理論以人格特征客體化為基礎(chǔ)，而客體化是以使用方式先占實(shí)現(xiàn)，這就使得未曾商業(yè)利用人格特征者對其人格特征上的財產(chǎn)利益不享有權(quán)利。而且康德財產(chǎn)理論要求客體具有對抗性才談得上因侵害了財產(chǎn)利益侵害了人格自由，人格特征的非對抗性特質(zhì)使得這一理論難以逾越。4、人格自治理論既不用糾結(jié)于權(quán)利人是否對人格特征財產(chǎn)價值付出勞動的問題，也可以回避人格特征的不可對抗性和非耗竭性特質(zhì)。人格自治理論從自治的自我界定出發(fā)論證人格特征上財產(chǎn)利益保護(hù)的正當(dāng)性，其出發(fā)點(diǎn)是從人格利益出發(fā)界定財產(chǎn)利益的正當(dāng)性，與其他理論從財產(chǎn)利益本身出發(fā)論證其保護(hù)的正當(dāng)性基礎(chǔ)不同。以人格利益為出發(fā)點(diǎn)的視角更接近問題的核心。在制度設(shè)計上也可以兼顧人格利益與財產(chǎn)利益并將“人格特征”的范圍限制在具有人格聯(lián)系的范圍內(nèi)。 第三章介紹英國、澳大利亞和加拿大魁北克省的不正當(dāng)競爭模式。不正當(dāng)競爭模式首先承認(rèn)擅自商業(yè)利用他人人格特征是構(gòu)成侵權(quán)的，其次認(rèn)為侵害的是財產(chǎn)權(quán)。這種財產(chǎn)權(quán)在仿冒制度下被解釋為商譽(yù)中的財產(chǎn)權(quán)，在盜用理論下被解釋為應(yīng)受保護(hù)的無形財產(chǎn)權(quán)或人格特征中的財產(chǎn)權(quán)。相較傳統(tǒng)盜用理論下的水土不服以及在新型盜用理論下的缺乏系統(tǒng)建構(gòu)，人格特征商業(yè)利用問題在仿冒制度下雖限制重重卻有豐厚的制度土壤，因此仿冒依然是不正當(dāng)競爭模式下解決人格特征商業(yè)利用問題的核心制度。以仿冒和盜用理論解決人格特征商業(yè)利用問題的不正當(dāng)競爭模式還只是處于探索初期的權(quán)宜之計，但這種權(quán)宜之計對認(rèn)識成熟制度的形成過程以及對同樣處于探索初期的我國頗具認(rèn)識論意義。 第四章詳論美國隱私權(quán)和公開權(quán)模式。本章首先沿著歷史發(fā)展的主線，介紹美國普通法從隱私權(quán)到公開權(quán)的制度創(chuàng)新史。隱私權(quán)的產(chǎn)生以普通法從保護(hù)知識財產(chǎn)的判例中尋求人格利益保護(hù)的制度基礎(chǔ)開始，借助誹謗制度和知識產(chǎn)權(quán)制度，最終形成獨(dú)立于財產(chǎn)權(quán)的保護(hù)純精神性利益的隱私權(quán)制度。公開權(quán)的產(chǎn)生則以普通法從隱私權(quán)判例中尋求人格特征財產(chǎn)利益保護(hù)的制度基礎(chǔ)開始，最終形成獨(dú)立于隱私權(quán)的保護(hù)人格特征財產(chǎn)利益的公開權(quán)制度。隱私權(quán)與財產(chǎn)權(quán)的獨(dú)立使各自的范圍界定得以明晰，但二者歷史上的各種糾纏在當(dāng)下仍有體現(xiàn)。就人格特征商業(yè)利用而言，美國大部分州共識的保護(hù)模式是：涉及人格利益的部分由隱私權(quán)保護(hù)，，涉及財產(chǎn)利益的部分由公開權(quán)保護(hù)。另外，本章還分別就公開權(quán)的權(quán)利性質(zhì)、保護(hù)對象和范圍、公開權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任構(gòu)成要件以及公開權(quán)的訴訟時效、舉證責(zé)任、救濟(jì)方法做了介紹。 第五章，德國一般人格權(quán)模式。德國以一般人格權(quán)這一框架性權(quán)利將未被制定法保護(hù)的具體人格利益和財產(chǎn)利益通過德國民法典第823條第1款中的“其他權(quán)利”納入侵權(quán)法保護(hù)范圍。本章首先從德國民法典關(guān)于人格權(quán)的規(guī)定和不足出發(fā)介紹一般人格權(quán)在司法造法背景下的創(chuàng)設(shè)。其次，梳理姓名權(quán)和肖像權(quán)的制定法規(guī)定和適用以及一般人格權(quán)對二者的補(bǔ)充。最后介紹一般人格權(quán)在補(bǔ)充姓名權(quán)、肖像權(quán)不足以外還具體實(shí)現(xiàn)了人格特征財產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)、私領(lǐng)域保護(hù)與名譽(yù)的保護(hù)以及慰撫金請求權(quán)。就人格特征商業(yè)利用問題而言，涉及姓名、肖像等人格利益的以姓名權(quán)和肖像權(quán)的法律規(guī)定為請求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)，涉及姓名、肖像以外的人格利益以及人格特征上財產(chǎn)利益的以一般人格權(quán)為請求權(quán)基礎(chǔ)。 第六章，人格特征商業(yè)利用問題在我國的現(xiàn)狀。本章圍繞司法探索這一中心，以案例分析方法，通過案例的歸類整理得出認(rèn)識：司法界在缺乏系統(tǒng)理論支撐的情況下，面對逐漸增多的人格特征未經(jīng)同意被商業(yè)利用案件，不得不對現(xiàn)行立法做更寬泛的解釋。勉強(qiáng)承認(rèn)人格特征中的財產(chǎn)利益，并對其侵權(quán)構(gòu)成要件、損害賠償額計算等問題做了雖缺乏姮服力卻大膽的探索。表現(xiàn)出新問題探索中常見的簡明說理。 第七章，人格特征商業(yè)利用問題我國路徑選擇。帶著第一章所形成的問題意識，通過對不正當(dāng)競爭模式、美國隱私權(quán)和公開權(quán)模式以及德國一般人格權(quán)模式的比較考察，我們至少可以從宏觀上了解到這樣兩個個共同之處：其一，比較研究對象在近代以來均在法律層面表現(xiàn)出對人格自治和人格尊嚴(yán)更大的尊重，不斷拓寬受法律保護(hù)的人格利益的范圍。其二，比較研究對象在人格特征財產(chǎn)利益應(yīng)受保護(hù)這個基本點(diǎn)上是達(dá)成共識的。雖然就人格特征中人格利益和財產(chǎn)利益的關(guān)系問題存在認(rèn)識上的分歧，但三種模式在面臨新問題時都表現(xiàn)出對現(xiàn)有制度的依賴和突破，最終都采取了非權(quán)利化的侵權(quán)法保護(hù)路徑。就我國人格特征商業(yè)利用問題解決路徑而言，我們可以從人格特征上人格利益和財產(chǎn)利益兩方面入手。人格利益的保護(hù)通過現(xiàn)行人格權(quán)的解釋與適用可以實(shí)現(xiàn)；財產(chǎn)利益的保護(hù)可以通過非權(quán)利化的侵權(quán)法保護(hù)方式實(shí)現(xiàn)。非權(quán)利化的保護(hù)方式具體通過侵權(quán)責(zé)任法第2條和第20條的解釋與適用實(shí)現(xiàn)，并包括未經(jīng)同意、使用了原告的人格特征、為了商業(yè)利益、因利用造成了損害四個侵權(quán)責(zé)任構(gòu)成要件。 本文力圖在以下幾個方面對現(xiàn)有理論和研究有所推進(jìn)：1、人格特征商業(yè)利用術(shù)語澄清。2、研究視角上選取人格利益與財產(chǎn)利益雙重視角。3、比較研究資料的擴(kuò)充與研究認(rèn)識的深入。4、以人格特征商業(yè)利用涉及的具體問題點(diǎn)為進(jìn)路對我國司法案例進(jìn)行整理分析。5、提出以非權(quán)利化的侵權(quán)法保護(hù)方式保護(hù)人格特征財產(chǎn)利益，并試著就保護(hù)路徑實(shí)現(xiàn)和侵權(quán)責(zé)任構(gòu)成要件作出探索。
[Abstract]:The personality characteristic is the generalization of the identifiable external image of the natural person. The commercial use of personality characteristics is to increase the economic benefits to promote or sell products with the personality characteristics of the natural person. Although the commercial use of personality features is the property value surrounding the personality characteristics, but there is no lack of the infringement of personality in the process of commercial use. What's more, the property value itself is difficult to cut off the relationship between personality and personality because it is connected with personality characteristics. Therefore, this paper examines the commercial use of personality characteristics in the dual perspective of personality interests and property interests. The property interests bearing the character characteristics are between the traditional personality rights and property rights. The special status of the zone has become the new problem of the research of the civil law, and it has become the focus of this study. However, the personality interests of the personality characteristics are essential to us to understand the interests of the personality property and to choose the reasonable protection path. Through the full text, with the comparative research method as the main axis, in the process of exploring the answer, we should try to deepen the understanding of personality interests and property interests, and make suggestions for the current system, especially to provide the legal basis for the protection of personality property interests.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into seven chapters and divided into three parts. The first part (the first and second chapters) is a basic study, including the basic issues of commercial utilization of personality characteristics and the justification of the protection of personality property interests; the second part (third, fourth and fifth) is the comparative research part, around the unfair competition. The mode of controversy, the right to privacy and the right to open the right mode, the general personality right mode, the third part (sixth chapters and seventh chapters) is on the basis of comparative study to understand the current situation of the commercial use of personality characteristics in China and put forward the solution path.
The first chapter is the basic problem of commercial utilization of personality characteristics. This chapter is the theoretical research status of the basic understanding of the basic understanding of the legal phenomenon of commercial utilization of personality characteristics in China. The efforts made from the aspects of terms selection, definition, typology and the basic legal issues involved are also the basis of the full text. Starting with the common social phenomenon of "endorsement" and "endorsed", it collate and compare the choice of a number of terminology of the phenomenon by domestic scholars, and use semantic interpretation methods to recognize and synthesize the essence of the legal phenomenon by means of semantic interpretation, and choose the term "commercial use of personality characteristics". Secondly, "personality", "business", "business". On the basis of the understanding of the connotation and the extension of the commercial utilization of personality characteristics, three types of analysis are made on the commercial utilization of personality characteristics. The commercial use of personality characteristics is used as a declaration or promotion of the product or service which is an identifiable individual symbol of the natural person. The following three standards are selected in this article. Line type analysis: 1, with the use of form as the standard, the commercial use of personality characteristics includes supporting the support or recommending attitude of the natural person to the product and the non supporting utilization of the personality characteristics of the natural person. 2, it can be divided into the standard of whether the use of personality characteristics is carried out according to the person's will. The use of authorization to obtain permission and the unauthorized use of.3 without its consent, another classification that is not long enough but very helpful to the nature of the nature of the commercial use of personality characteristics is divided into the commercial use of personality characteristics according to the nature of the interests involved: (1) the property interests and personal interests of all the personalities of the personalities are infringed at the same time. Commercial utilization. (2) commercial utilization that only infringes on the interests of property. (3) the commercial utilization of personality characteristics only involving mental interests infringement. Again, the author makes a general understanding of the interests involved in the commercial utilization of personality characteristics, the personal interests and property interests, and the specific understanding of the commercial utilization of personality characteristics. Finally, the personality is special. The basic legal problems involved in commercial utilization are combed. The basic legal question that this article wants to study is the protection of personality interests and property interests in the commercial utilization of personality characteristics. The protection of property interests is the key and difficult point, but the discussion on the protection of personality interests is not important.
The second chapter is the justification for the protection of personality property interests. This chapter is based on the first chapter on the basic question of the protection of the interests of personality property - the prepositional introduction of the justification. Labor theory, the theory of distribution efficiency, Kant property theory, and the theory of personality autonomy are the key points mentioned in the current academic research. In addition to the reason.1, labor theory, labor theory of value, the theory of preventing unjust enrichment, and the theory of economic irritation from Rock's labor theory, besides the rationality of the theory of labor value, the other theories are demonstrated from the angle of external demand (social need). The former explains the interest of this property. It is my creation, which should belong to me; the latter embodies the idea of how the property interests of the personality are not asked. Since there is such a kind of interest, the interests belong to the personalities of the personalities of the society as a whole. The theory of labor values and classics based on the theory of Rock's labor theory, the theory of labor value and the classics. It is more or less focused on the legitimate basis of the interests of personality property. The theory of unjust enrichment emphasizes that the workers should not enjoy the right to enjoy the right; the labor value theory emphasizes that the laborers should enjoy the rights, and the theory of economic stimulation emphasizes the right to stimulate the right out of the consideration of increasing social wealth. The beneficial people work more actively. They all overestimate the role of the individual in the production of the economic value of personality characteristics. All the systems based on it create many difficulties.2. Although the theory of distribution efficiency is no longer dependent on Rock's labor theory, its weakness is similar to the economic stimulus theory, first in the non antagonism and the non exhaustion of personality characteristics. This precondition can not give a convincing answer to.3. The common point of Kant's property theory and personality autonomy is that both property interests and personality interests are considered. Kant's property theory is connected with freedom and personality, and the self boundary of property interests and autonomy in the theory of personality autonomy. The theory of Kant's property is based on the objectification of personality characteristics, and the objectification is realized in the way of use, which makes the persons who have not used the personality characteristics to enjoy the rights of property interests in their personality characteristics. The theory of personality freedom and personality characteristics makes it difficult to overstep the.4. The theory of personality autonomy does not tangle the problem of whether the right holder pays the labor of the personality property value or not, and avoids the non antagonistic and non exhaustive character of personality characteristics. The theory of personality autonomy defines self autonomy from self self self. The justification of the protection of property interests on the personality characteristics of the argument is to define the legitimacy of the property interests from the personality interests, and to demonstrate the legitimacy of the protection with other theories from the property interests itself. The perspective of the personality interests as the starting point is closer to the core of the problem. Personality interests and property interests limit the scope of "personality characteristics" in the context of personality ties.
The third chapter introduces the unfair competition mode in Britain, Australia and the Quebec province of Canada. The unfair competition mode first recognise that the commercial use of other people's personality is a tort, followed by the infringement of property rights. This property right is interpreted as the property right in the Goodwill under the counterfeit system, and is explained under the theory of embezzlement. For the protection of the intangible property rights or property rights in the personality characteristics, compared with the traditional embezzlement theory and the lack of systematic construction under the new theory of embezzlement, the problem of commercial utilization of personality characteristics has rich institutional soil under the counterfeit system, so the imitation is still an unfair competition model. The core system of the problem of commercial utilization of personality characteristics. The unfair competition mode of solving the problem of commercial use of personality characteristics by imitation and embezzlement is only a expedient measure in the early stage of exploration, but the expedient means the formation process of understanding the mature system and the epistemological significance to our country, which is also in the early stage of exploration.
The fourth chapter elaborates on the American right to privacy and the right to privacy. This chapter first introduces the system innovation history of American ordinary law from the right to privacy to the right to publicity along the main line of historical development. The emergence of the right to privacy begins with the institutional basis for the protection of personality interests from the cases of protecting knowledge and property, with the aid of the defamation system and the system of intellectual property rights. Degree, and finally form a system of privacy protection that is independent of property rights to protect pure spiritual interests. The emergence of the right to public begins with the institutional basis of the common law to seek the protection of personality property interests from the privacy jurisprudence, and eventually forms a public right to protect the property interests of the private property, which is independent of privacy. Independence makes the definition of their scope clear, but all kinds of entanglement in the history of the two are still reflected in the present. In terms of commercial use of personality characteristics, the protection mode of most American state consensus is that part of the personal interests is protected by the right of privacy, and the part of the property interests is protected by the public right. The nature of the right to open, the object and scope of protection, the constitutive requirements of the right of publicity, the limitation of action, the burden of proof and the remedy methods are introduced.
The fifth chapter, the German general personality right mode. Germany, with the framework of the general personality right, incorporated the specific personality interests and property interests which were not protected by the law, through the "other rights" in the 823rd article of the German civil code and the "other rights" into the scope of the protection of the tort law. This paper introduces the creation of general personality right under the background of judicial law making. Secondly, it combs the provisions and application of the formulation of the right of name and portrait and the supplement of the general personality right to the two parties. Finally, it introduces the right of the general personality to supplement the right of name, and the protection of the personal property interests, the protection and the name of private domain. The protection of reputation and the claim of consolation gold. In terms of commercial use of personality characteristics, the basis of the right of request is the legal provision of name and portrait, including the right of name and portrait, involving the name, the personality interests other than the portrait and the property interests of the personality as the basis of the claim right.
The sixth chapter, the status of commercial utilization of personality characteristics in our country. This chapter focuses on the center of judicial exploration, by case analysis method, through the classification of cases to get the understanding: in the case of the lack of systematic theoretical support, the judiciary has to face the increasing personality characteristics without consent to be commercially used. The law makes a more broad explanation. It is difficult to recognize the property interests of the personality characteristics, and to make a bold exploration of the elements of its tort and the calculation of the amount of damages. It shows a common and simple reason in the exploration of the new problems.
The seventh chapter, the choice of the commercial utilization of personality characteristics in China. With the problem consciousness formed in the first chapter, through the comparison of the unfair competition mode, the American privacy and public rights model and the German general personality right model, we can at least solve these two common points from the macro level: first, comparative research. In modern times, they have shown greater respect for personality autonomy and personal dignity at the legal level, and constantly expand the protection of persons protected by law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D913

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 薛軍;;揭開“一般人格權(quán)”的面紗——兼論比較法研究中的“體系意識”[J];比較法研究;2008年05期

2 王澤鑒;;人格權(quán)的具體化及其保護(hù)范圍·隱私權(quán)篇(上)[J];比較法研究;2008年06期

3 張紅;;“以營利為目的”與肖像權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任認(rèn)定——以案例為基礎(chǔ)的實(shí)證研究[J];比較法研究;2012年03期

4 吳鈞;名譽(yù)及名譽(yù)權(quán)的概念和特性研究[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);1999年01期

5 曹險峰;在權(quán)利與法益之間——對侵權(quán)行為客體的解讀[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2005年05期

6 張丹丹;張帆;;商品化權(quán)性質(zhì)的理論之爭及反思[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年05期

7 李巖;;民事法益的界定[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2008年03期

8 藍(lán)藍(lán);;人格與財產(chǎn)二元權(quán)利體系面臨的困境與突破——以“人格商品化”為視角展開[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2006年03期

9 孫國華，黃金華;論法律上的利益選擇[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;1995年04期

10 董炳和;論形象權(quán)[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報);1998年04期

本文編號：2092360