發(fā)布時間：2019-05-19 17:35

【摘要】：隨著我國經(jīng)濟(jì)水平的提升，人們文化水平及審美要求不斷提高，房地產(chǎn)消費(fèi)者不再僅滿足于建筑是提供人們遮寒避雨的場所，對建筑作品的藝術(shù)美感提出越來越高的要求。為了順應(yīng)市場需求，房地產(chǎn)開發(fā)商在滿足人們對建筑使用功能要求的基礎(chǔ)上，建設(shè)了越來越多外觀新穎的建筑作品，增強(qiáng)了城市多元化美感，極大地提升了城市形象。但是，建筑作品作為建筑師創(chuàng)造力的結(jié)晶，越來越多遭到不法商人的抄襲復(fù)制，極大地?fù)p害了著作權(quán)人的權(quán)益。業(yè)內(nèi)要求保護(hù)建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)的呼聲越來越高，如何保護(hù)建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)免遭侵犯引起了人們的高度重視。 針對這種日益嚴(yán)重的侵權(quán)現(xiàn)象，筆者從建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)侵權(quán)現(xiàn)狀入手，力求在明晰建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)侵權(quán)方式和判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)基礎(chǔ)上，，尋求認(rèn)定建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)侵權(quán)的一般規(guī)則，并試圖在立法和司法層面對我國建筑作品著作權(quán)保護(hù)提出自己的建議，以期對我國《著作權(quán)法》的完善有所裨益。本文共包括三個部分： 第一部分主要描寫了建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)侵權(quán)現(xiàn)狀。主要通過對“盛放鳥巢”煙花侵權(quán)案、裴多福建筑師事務(wù)所訴“錦繡天地·西湖國際俱樂部”項目侵權(quán)案等具有較大社會影響的侵權(quán)案件進(jìn)行分析，揭示了建筑物(或構(gòu)筑物)、建筑設(shè)計圖以及建筑模型是建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)侵權(quán)案件主要侵權(quán)客體，對這三類客體侵權(quán)復(fù)制導(dǎo)致了著作權(quán)人巨大的經(jīng)濟(jì)利益損失，喚醒了人們對建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)的保護(hù)意識。 第二部分是建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)侵權(quán)認(rèn)定，主要是對侵權(quán)復(fù)制的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)及方式進(jìn)行分析，指出我國在建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)保護(hù)方面一些不足之處。侵權(quán)復(fù)制方式主要是平面到平面、平面到立體、立體到平面以及立體到立體的復(fù)制；侵權(quán)復(fù)制的內(nèi)容是針對建筑作品具有獨創(chuàng)性部分進(jìn)行復(fù)制，這種復(fù)制行為導(dǎo)致了侵權(quán)作品與原建筑作品實質(zhì)性相似。最后筆者對現(xiàn)在司法實務(wù)中常見的兩種認(rèn)定建筑作品實質(zhì)性相似的方法進(jìn)行了比較分析。 第三部分主要是針對我國建筑作品復(fù)制權(quán)保護(hù)方面的欠缺，在立法、司法程序?qū)用嫣岢鲆恍┙ㄗh并嘗試探索權(quán)利人自力救濟(jì)的途徑。
[Abstract]:With the improvement of China's economic level and the continuous improvement of people's cultural level and aesthetic requirements, real estate consumers are no longer satisfied with architecture as a place to shelter people from the cold and rain, and put forward higher and higher requirements for the artistic beauty of architectural works. In order to meet the market demand, real estate developers have built more and more novel architectural works on the basis of meeting the functional requirements of building use, which has enhanced the aesthetic feeling of urban diversification and greatly improved the image of the city. However, as the crystallization of architect's creativity, architectural works are more and more copied by illegal businessmen, which greatly damages the rights and interests of copyright owners. The call for the protection of the right of reproduction of architectural works is getting higher and higher in the industry. How to protect the right of reproduction of architectural works from infringement has attracted great attention. In view of this increasingly serious infringement phenomenon, the author starts with the present situation of the infringement of the right of reproduction of construction works, and strives to seek the general rules for determining the infringement of the right of reproduction of construction works on the basis of clarifying the mode and judgment standard of the infringement of the right of reproduction of construction works. This paper also tries to put forward some suggestions on the copyright protection of architectural works in China at the legislative and judicial levels, in order to be beneficial to the perfection of the copyright Law of our country. This paper consists of three parts: the first part mainly describes the status quo of the infringement of the right of reproduction of architectural works. Mainly through the "bird nest" fireworks infringement case, Pei Duofu architect firm v. "Jinxiu Tiandi West Lake International Club" project infringement cases with great social impact on the analysis of infringement cases, such as the "bird nest" fireworks infringement case, Peidofu architect firm v. "Jinxiu Tiandi West Lake International Club" project infringement cases, etc. It is revealed that buildings (or structures), architectural drawings and architectural models are the main infringement objects in cases of infringement of the right of reproduction of architectural works, and the infringement and reproduction of these three types of objects has led to the huge loss of economic interests of copyright owners. It awakens people's consciousness of protecting the right to reproduce architectural works. The second part is the cognizance of the right of reproduction of architectural works, which mainly analyzes the standards and methods of infringing reproduction, and points out some shortcomings in the protection of the right of reproduction of architectural works in our country. The main ways of infringing replication are from plane to plane, from plane to stereoscopic, from stereoscopic to plane and from stereoscopic to stereoscopic. The content of tort reproduction is to copy the original part of architectural works, which leads to the substantial similarity between infringing works and original architectural works. Finally, the author makes a comparative analysis of the two common methods in judicial practice to identify the substantive similarity of architectural works. The third part mainly aims at the lack of protection of the right of reproduction of architectural works in our country, puts forward some suggestions at the level of legislation and judicial procedure, and tries to explore the ways of self-relief of the obligee.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 盧海君;;美國的建筑作品版權(quán)制度及對我國的啟示[J];北方法學(xué);2010年02期

2 毛煜煥;徐蕓;;建筑設(shè)計作品的著作權(quán)保護(hù)[J];法律適用;2007年04期

3 朱理;;建筑作品著作權(quán)的侵權(quán)判定[J];法律適用;2010年07期

4 馮曉青;付繼存;;著作權(quán)法中的復(fù)制權(quán)研究[J];法學(xué)家;2011年03期

5 李偉文;論著作權(quán)客體之獨創(chuàng)性[J];法學(xué)評論;2000年01期

6 朱嘯飛;;建筑作品的法律特征及其保護(hù)條件[J];法治研究;2010年06期

7 石亞西;建筑作品版權(quán)保護(hù)及其對我國建筑設(shè)計的影響[J];工程建設(shè)與設(shè)計;2003年10期

8 康佑發(fā);版權(quán)侵權(quán)認(rèn)定方法探究[J];廣東廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報;2005年02期

9 楊利華;;我國著作權(quán)客體制度檢討[J];法學(xué)雜志;2013年08期

10 胡超;;建筑作品定義之重構(gòu)[J];池州學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年04期

本文編號：2480922