本文選題：收回權(quán)　切入點：經(jīng)濟　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 著作權(quán)法上的收回權(quán)是指權(quán)利人在特定條件下,收回已經(jīng)發(fā)表的作品,禁止他人復(fù)制發(fā)行其已經(jīng)表示收回的作品的權(quán)利。廣義的收回權(quán)包括三種類型:因不作為而引起的收回權(quán),因觀點改變、內(nèi)容錯誤而引起的收回權(quán),特定時間點的收回權(quán)。該制度主要存在于法國、德國、意大利等以保護作者精神權(quán)利為主的大陸法系國家,并被越來越多的國家和地區(qū)所接受和引入。但是,由于收回權(quán)本身的特殊性以及該權(quán)利的運行對市場交易秩序的沖擊性,它從存在之初就存在著廣泛的爭議,而且對于其合理性和可行性的爭議也從來沒有停止過。 我國《著作權(quán)法》未規(guī)定收回權(quán)制度。因此,長期以來,所看到的僅限于收回權(quán)制度的基本概念的介紹,而沒有對各國相關(guān)制度及其理論和實踐的深入了解和研究。但隨著知識經(jīng)濟時代的到來,如何通過法律保護對知識產(chǎn)品的創(chuàng)造者提供順應(yīng)時代的充分保護就成為一個重要課題。收回權(quán)作為對作者提供高水平保護的權(quán)利,在這一時期就有了較高的研究價值。因此,本文擬通過對該權(quán)利相關(guān)知識的初步研究及探討,以促進人們對著作權(quán)中收回權(quán)制度的認識和保護。 本文共分為四部分。第一部分,收回權(quán)的總體介紹。在這一部分內(nèi)容中,筆者通過對收回權(quán)廣義、狹義概念,收回權(quán)的法律特征,收回權(quán)行使的一般條件以及收回權(quán)性質(zhì)的介紹,使讀者對該權(quán)利的整體面貌有個較為清晰地認識。第二部分,收回權(quán)的分類。在這部分中主要借鑒了各國比較成功的立法經(jīng)驗,根據(jù)收回權(quán)的三種類型的特征進行了較為詳細的解構(gòu)和分析。第三部分,收回權(quán)的理論分析。這一部分作為本文的重點,從經(jīng)濟、文化、法律這三個角度出發(fā),說明了收回權(quán)制度存在的價值和意義,并就收回權(quán)制度目前在學(xué)界中所存在的論爭的焦點問題提出了筆者的看法。該部分實際上是對學(xué)界中關(guān)于收回權(quán)存在的合理性和實踐中的可行性的論證。第四部分,我國收回權(quán)制度的構(gòu)建。筆者根據(jù)我國的法治現(xiàn)狀同時借鑒外國的立法經(jīng)驗,就我國制定收回權(quán)制度提出了初步的立法構(gòu)想。
[Abstract]:The right of restitution in copyright law refers to the right holder to recover his published work under certain conditions, The right to prohibit others from reproducing or distributing a work that they have indicated to be recovered. The broad right of restitution consists of three types: the right to retract due to omission, the right to retract due to a change of opinion, and the right to recover due to erroneous content, The system mainly exists in France, Germany, Italy and other civil law countries which mainly protect the spiritual rights of authors, and is accepted and introduced by more and more countries and regions. Due to the particularity of the right and the impact of its operation on the order of market transactions, there have been extensive disputes since the beginning of its existence, and the dispute on its rationality and feasibility has never stopped. The copyright Law of our country does not provide for the system of the right of restitution. Therefore, for a long time, what we have seen is only the introduction of the basic concepts of the system of the right of restitution. However, with the advent of the era of knowledge economy, there has been no in-depth understanding and study of the relevant institutions and their theories and practices in various countries. How to protect the creators of knowledge products by law becomes an important subject. As the right to provide high level of protection to the authors, the right of recovery has higher research value in this period. This paper intends to promote the understanding and protection of the system of the right of recovery in copyright through the preliminary study and discussion of the relevant knowledge of this right. This article is divided into four parts. The first part, the general introduction of the right of recovery. In this part, the author through the broad sense of the right of recovery, narrow sense concept, the legal characteristics of the right of recovery, The general conditions of the exercise of the right of restitution and the introduction of the nature of the right of restitution make the reader have a clearer understanding of the overall appearance of the right. Part two, the classification of the right of restitution. In this part, the author mainly draws lessons from the more successful legislative experience of various countries. According to the characteristics of the three types of the right of recovery, this paper makes a detailed deconstruction and analysis. The third part, the theoretical analysis of the right of recovery. This part as the focus of this article, from the economic, cultural, legal perspective, It explains the value and significance of the existence of the system of the right of recovery. The author also puts forward the author's opinion on the focus of the controversy in the academic circles. This part is actually a demonstration of the rationality of the existence of the right of restitution and the feasibility of the practice in the academic circles. According to the current situation of the rule of law in our country and drawing on the legislative experience of foreign countries, the author puts forward a preliminary legislative conception for the establishment of the system of the right of recovery in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D923.41

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 吳漢東;關(guān)于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)本體、主體與客體的重新認識——以財產(chǎn)所有權(quán)為比較研究對象[J];法學(xué)評論;2000年05期

2 劉沂江;著作精神權(quán)利基本問題分析[J];貴州民族學(xué)院學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2004年02期

3 王國紅;;論修改權(quán)和保護作品完整權(quán)[J];湖北師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2006年06期

4 劉凱湘,張云平;意思自治原則的變遷及其經(jīng)濟分析[J];中外法學(xué);1997年04期

5 張玉敏;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的概念和法律特征[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2001年05期

6 李莉;;論作者精神權(quán)利的雙重性[J];中國法學(xué);2006年03期

7 李琛;質(zhì)疑知識產(chǎn)權(quán)之“人格財產(chǎn)一體性”[J];中國社會科學(xué);2004年02期

，

本文編號：1651795