論視聽表演者權利的保護
發(fā)布時間：2019-03-24 15:22
【摘要】：2012年世界知識產(chǎn)權組織外交會議通過《視聽表演北京條約》。在此之前，三大國際條約均賦予了表演者以權利，控制其被固定在“錄音制品”中的表演，卻未對其固定在“視聽錄制品”（audiovisual fixation）中的表演予以相同程度的保護。 而《北京條約》中規(guī)定，締約國應當為表演者針對“視聽錄制品”中的表演設立表明身份權、禁止歪曲權、復制權、發(fā)行權和向公眾提供權。締約國還可視情況設立權利，使表演者得以就他人對其“視聽錄制品”中的表演實施的出租、廣播和以其他方式進行傳播的行為加以控制。從而宣告表演者權利無法得到全面保護這一歷史的終結(jié)。 近乎與此同時，我國對《著作權法》的第三次修改正引起社會各界的廣泛關注和參與。修訂形成的《修改草案》中對視聽表演者提供了保護，并對視聽表演者的權利歸屬規(guī)定了權利轉(zhuǎn)讓推定和“二次獲酬權”，引發(fā)了學界和產(chǎn)業(yè)界的激烈討論。 本文試圖回答三個問題：一、視聽表演者權利的基礎是什么；二、視聽表演者權利的歸屬應當采取什么模式；三、是否應當設立額外的“二次獲酬權”來保障視聽表演者的經(jīng)濟權利。 第一章首先分析以鄰接權保護表演者經(jīng)濟權利的正當性。然后通過歷史研究的方法，總結(jié)20世紀締結(jié)的三大鄰接權條約不保護視聽表演的背景原因，并評價該原因的合理性。最后通過梳理《北京條約》對國民待遇的討論，進一步明確條約背景下，對視聽表演者權利的保護范圍。 第二章首先總結(jié)外交談判期間對視聽表演者權利歸屬的幾種模式，尤其重點分析權利轉(zhuǎn)讓推定的意義。然后對我國兩分法的保護模式進行梳理和評價。最后提出修改草案引發(fā)的問題。 第三章接著分析對推定轉(zhuǎn)讓的專有權利，，是否需要設立額外的“二次獲酬權”以保障表演者的經(jīng)濟權利。首先分析草案的模式和條約義務，然后對國外立法例加以整理，最后提出對增設該權利的合理性分析。
[Abstract]:The 2012 WIPO diplomatic Conference adopted the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual performances. Prior to this, all three international treaties gave performers the right to control their performances fixed in "sound recordings", but failed to provide the same level of protection for performances fixed in "audio-visual recordings" (audiovisual fixation). The Beijing Treaty stipulates that States parties shall establish for performers the right of identification, prohibition of distortions, reproduction, distribution and provision of rights to the public with respect to the performance in the Audio-visual Recorder. States parties may also establish the right, as appropriate, to enable performers to exercise control over the letting, broadcasting and other dissemination of performances in their "audio-visual recordings". Thus proclaiming the performer's rights cannot be fully protected the end of this history. Almost at the same time, the third revision of copyright Law in China is attracting extensive attention and participation from all walks of life. The revised draft provides protection for audiovisual performers, and defines the presumption of transfer of rights and the right to "secondary remuneration" for audio-visual performers, thus arousing intense discussion in the academic and industrial circles. This paper attempts to answer three questions: first, what is the basis of the right of audiovisual performer, second, what mode should be adopted to attribute the right of audiovisual performer; Third, should an additional right of secondary remuneration be set up to protect the economic rights of audiovisual performers. The first chapter analyzes the legitimacy of protecting performer's economic rights by adjacent rights. Then, through the method of historical research, this paper summarizes the background reasons why the three neighboring rights treaties concluded in the 20th century do not protect audiovisual performances, and evaluates the rationality of this reason. Finally, by combing the discussion on the national treatment of the Beijing Treaty, the scope of protection of the rights of audiovisual performers in the context of the treaty is further clarified. The second chapter summarizes several modes of rights attribution of audiovisual performers during diplomatic negotiations, especially analyzes the significance of the presumption of transfer of rights. Then the protection mode of dichotomy in our country is combed and evaluated. Finally, the problems caused by the revised draft are put forward. The third chapter analyzes the exclusive right of presumption transfer, whether it is necessary to set up additional right of secondary remuneration to protect the performer's economic rights. First, the model and treaty obligations of the draft are analyzed, then the foreign legislative cases are sorted out, and the rationality of adding this right is put forward at the end of the paper.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.41
本文編號：2446443
[Abstract]:The 2012 WIPO diplomatic Conference adopted the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual performances. Prior to this, all three international treaties gave performers the right to control their performances fixed in "sound recordings", but failed to provide the same level of protection for performances fixed in "audio-visual recordings" (audiovisual fixation). The Beijing Treaty stipulates that States parties shall establish for performers the right of identification, prohibition of distortions, reproduction, distribution and provision of rights to the public with respect to the performance in the Audio-visual Recorder. States parties may also establish the right, as appropriate, to enable performers to exercise control over the letting, broadcasting and other dissemination of performances in their "audio-visual recordings". Thus proclaiming the performer's rights cannot be fully protected the end of this history. Almost at the same time, the third revision of copyright Law in China is attracting extensive attention and participation from all walks of life. The revised draft provides protection for audiovisual performers, and defines the presumption of transfer of rights and the right to "secondary remuneration" for audio-visual performers, thus arousing intense discussion in the academic and industrial circles. This paper attempts to answer three questions: first, what is the basis of the right of audiovisual performer, second, what mode should be adopted to attribute the right of audiovisual performer; Third, should an additional right of secondary remuneration be set up to protect the economic rights of audiovisual performers. The first chapter analyzes the legitimacy of protecting performer's economic rights by adjacent rights. Then, through the method of historical research, this paper summarizes the background reasons why the three neighboring rights treaties concluded in the 20th century do not protect audiovisual performances, and evaluates the rationality of this reason. Finally, by combing the discussion on the national treatment of the Beijing Treaty, the scope of protection of the rights of audiovisual performers in the context of the treaty is further clarified. The second chapter summarizes several modes of rights attribution of audiovisual performers during diplomatic negotiations, especially analyzes the significance of the presumption of transfer of rights. Then the protection mode of dichotomy in our country is combed and evaluated. Finally, the problems caused by the revised draft are put forward. The third chapter analyzes the exclusive right of presumption transfer, whether it is necessary to set up additional right of secondary remuneration to protect the performer's economic rights. First, the model and treaty obligations of the draft are analyzed, then the foreign legislative cases are sorted out, and the rationality of adding this right is put forward at the end of the paper.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.41
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前5條
1 王遷;;《視聽表演北京條約》爭議問題及對我國國際義務的影響[J];法學;2012年10期
2 王遷;;《視聽表演北京條約》視野下著作權法的修訂[J];法商研究;2012年06期
3 周洪濤;;著作權法修改草案第二稿第三十六條的缺陷及修改建議[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2012年12期
4 左玉茹;;《視聽表演北京條約》:表演者權保護體系的進一步完善[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2012年07期
5 戴哲;;視聽作品“二次獲酬權”研究 以《著作權法》修改為契機[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2013年12期
本文編號：2446443
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/zhishichanquanfa/2446443.html
最近更新
教材專著
