本文關(guān)鍵詞： 網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán) 侵權(quán) 管轄權(quán) 博客　出處：《山東大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：滕州一作者鄭先生的博客文章在網(wǎng)站上未經(jīng)授權(quán),被網(wǎng)站或他人使用侵犯其信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)、署名權(quán)、保護(hù)作品完整權(quán)、獲得報(bào)酬權(quán)一案,在2011年成為了社會(huì)關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)。筆者作為維權(quán)律師代理該案,在辦理的過程中,感慨頗深,取證難,尋找侵權(quán)主體難,立案難等等之難。分析其根本原因,是網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)管轄權(quán)的規(guī)定及理論存在問題所致。鑒于此,本文圍繞越來(lái)越來(lái)越多網(wǎng)絡(luò)侵權(quán)糾紛,特別是網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)訴訟中的一個(gè)基本問題——管轄權(quán),進(jìn)行了分析。管轄權(quán)的確定是侵權(quán)訴訟程序的前提和基礎(chǔ),對(duì)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)侵權(quán)案件的管轄權(quán)問題,我國(guó)在這方面的理論研究不深入成熟,目前尚未達(dá)成有相對(duì)統(tǒng)一意見的管轄權(quán)原則。本文從網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)的侵權(quán)行為入手,結(jié)合我國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下著作權(quán)侵權(quán)現(xiàn)有的法律保護(hù)規(guī)定,運(yùn)用案例分析方法,分析網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)在法律保護(hù)方面存在的問題,最終得出可以將原告所在地作為網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)案件的管轄地優(yōu)先適用的結(jié)論。 全文除了引言和結(jié)語(yǔ)外,共分為六部分。第一部分筆者通過自己辦理網(wǎng)絡(luò)侵權(quán)案例,體會(huì)到網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)維權(quán)之難,很大程度上是因?yàn)楣茌牂?quán)方面的立法不完善,引起了筆者對(duì)有關(guān)著作權(quán)及管轄權(quán)問題的一些思考。第二部分分析我國(guó)目前有關(guān)網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)方面的法律規(guī)定,共分四節(jié)。第一節(jié)論述網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)的概念；第二節(jié)闡釋網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)人的認(rèn)定問題；第三節(jié)分析了網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)行為常見的幾種形式。第四節(jié)指出我國(guó)出臺(tái)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下著作權(quán)侵權(quán)法律規(guī)定的問題。第三部分講述我國(guó)關(guān)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)案件的司法管轄問題。從司法管轄的含義談到我國(guó)對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)管轄的規(guī)定,繼而指出我國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)管轄存在的問題。第四部分是國(guó)外對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)案件司法管轄的法律規(guī)定。有關(guān)網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)管轄權(quán)早已引起了發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的關(guān)注和重視,并形成了比較成熟完善的網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)管轄權(quán)的規(guī)定。該部分主要就美國(guó)、歐洲、加拿大等國(guó)家有關(guān)管轄權(quán)的相關(guān)法律規(guī)定作出了歸納和分析。第五部分對(duì)確定管轄權(quán)的新主權(quán)理論、管轄相對(duì)論等幾種主流理論進(jìn)行了分析。第六部分是本文的重點(diǎn)章節(jié)。該部分主要闡述我國(guó)在網(wǎng)絡(luò)侵權(quán)案件管轄權(quán)上存在的問題,并在借鑒外國(guó)這此問題的立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)我國(guó)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)管轄問題提出筆者的一些立法思考。首先,可以將原告所在地作為網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)案件管轄地優(yōu)先適用,此節(jié)分三點(diǎn)具體闡述了適用該原則的原因依據(jù)；同時(shí),為了防止原告適用上述原則濫訴,可以輔以適用“不方便法院”原則；其次,傳統(tǒng)的侵權(quán)行為實(shí)施地仍是管轄地確定的一般原則；最后,筆者要強(qiáng)調(diào)的是并不能放棄被告住所地法院管轄,但要稍作補(bǔ)充。
[Abstract]:An author of Tengzhou, Mr. Zheng, whose blog article is unauthorized on the website, was used by the website or others to infringe on his right to network dissemination of information, to be signed, to protect the integrity of the work, and to be paid. In 2011, I became the focus of social attention. In the process of handling the case, the author, as a rights lawyer, had deep feelings, difficulty in obtaining evidence, difficulty in finding the main body of infringement, difficulty in filing a case, and so on. In view of this, this article revolves around more and more network infringement disputes, especially one of the basic problems in the network copyright infringement litigation-jurisdiction. The determination of jurisdiction is the premise and foundation of tort proceedings. For the jurisdiction of network tort cases, the theoretical research in this respect is not mature in our country. At present, the principle of jurisdiction with relatively uniform opinions has not been reached. This paper begins with the infringement of network copyright and combines the existing legal protection provisions of copyright infringement under the network environment in our country, and applies the case analysis method. This paper analyzes the problems existing in the legal protection of network copyright and finally draws the conclusion that the plaintiff's location can be used as the jurisdiction of the network copyright case first. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into six parts. The first part of the author through their own network infringement cases, to understand the network copyright rights protection difficulties, to a large extent, because of the jurisdiction of the legislation is not perfect, The second part analyzes the current legal provisions of network copyright infringement in China, which is divided into four sections. The first section discusses the concept of network copyright infringement; The second section explains the identification of network copyright infringer; Section three analyzes several common forms of network copyright infringement. Section 4th points out the problems of copyright infringement laws and regulations issued by our country under the network environment. The third part talks about the network copyright infringement cases in our country. From the meaning of judicial jurisdiction to our country's regulations on the jurisdiction of network copyright, Then it points out the problems existing in the jurisdiction of network copyright in our country. Part 4th is the legal regulation of judicial jurisdiction of network copyright infringement cases in foreign countries. The jurisdiction of network copyright has already attracted the attention and attention of developed countries. And has formed relatively mature and perfect regulations of network copyright jurisdiction. This part mainly concerns the United States, Europe, The relevant laws and regulations on jurisdiction in Canada and other countries have been summarized and analyzed. Part 5th gives a new sovereignty theory for the determination of jurisdiction. Part 6th is the key chapter of this paper. This part mainly expounds the problems existing in the jurisdiction of network infringement cases in China, and on the basis of drawing on the legislative experience of foreign countries on this issue. The author puts forward some legislative thoughts on the jurisdiction of network copyright in our country. Firstly, the plaintiff's location can be used as the jurisdiction place of network copyright infringement cases in priority. This section elaborates the reasons for the application of this principle in three aspects. At the same time, in order to prevent the plaintiff from overapplying the above principles, the principle of "inconvenient courts" can be applied; secondly, the traditional place of tort is still the general principle determined by the jurisdiction; finally, The author emphasizes that the court jurisdiction of the defendant's domicile should not be waived, but should be supplemented.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D923.41

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 呂永莉;論網(wǎng)絡(luò)影音產(chǎn)業(yè)的著作權(quán)保護(hù)[D];吉林財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1495680