發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-11 17:43

  本文選題：最終用戶 + 侵犯著作權(quán)��； 參考：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,最終用戶使用盜版的行為業(yè)已成為一種比較突出的社會(huì)現(xiàn)象。論文對(duì)最終用戶使用盜版的行為是否應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)法律責(zé)任以及承擔(dān)怎樣的法律責(zé)任進(jìn)行了論證。論文共分為以下五章: 第一章為最終用戶的概述。本部分對(duì)最終用戶及最終用戶涉及侵犯著作權(quán)的行為進(jìn)行了概述,認(rèn)為最終用戶是指以使用為目的,對(duì)享有著作權(quán)的作品進(jìn)行最終消費(fèi)的自然人、法人或者其他組織,具有廣泛性、使用性、終端性和非限定性等特征。最終用戶涉及侵犯著作權(quán)的行為是指最終用戶未經(jīng)著作權(quán)人許可,使用侵權(quán)復(fù)制品或者最終用戶超出著作權(quán)人許可范圍,使用享有著作權(quán)作品的行為,具有隱蔽性、高發(fā)性、手段多樣性和公眾容忍性等特點(diǎn)。 第二章為主張最終用戶不負(fù)刑事責(zé)任的觀點(diǎn)。本部分對(duì)主張最終用戶不應(yīng)承擔(dān)刑事責(zé)任的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了梳理,主張最終用戶不應(yīng)承擔(dān)刑事責(zé)任的觀點(diǎn)又分為免責(zé)論、有益論和民事責(zé)任論三種理論形態(tài)。免責(zé)論認(rèn)為,最終用戶使用盜版的行為應(yīng)當(dāng)免除法律責(zé)任;有益論認(rèn)為,最終用戶使用盜版的行為具有積極意義,不僅不應(yīng)該承擔(dān)法律責(zé)任,而是可以鼓勵(lì)的行為;民事責(zé)任論認(rèn)為,最終用戶使用盜版的行為至多只涉及到民事責(zé)任的追究。 第三章為主張最終用戶應(yīng)負(fù)刑事責(zé)任的觀點(diǎn)。本部分對(duì)主張最終用戶應(yīng)負(fù)刑事責(zé)任的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行介紹。根據(jù)主張承擔(dān)刑事責(zé)任的主體范圍的不同,最終用戶應(yīng)負(fù)刑事責(zé)任的觀點(diǎn)又有全部最終用戶應(yīng)負(fù)刑事責(zé)任和商業(yè)性最終用戶應(yīng)負(fù)刑事責(zé)任兩種理論樣態(tài)。全責(zé)論的觀點(diǎn)主張刑事責(zé)任的追究延伸到全部最終用戶;區(qū)分論的觀點(diǎn)則主張對(duì)最終用戶使用盜版的行為刑事責(zé)任的追究只限于商業(yè)性最終用戶。 第四章為一般性最終用戶入罪化批判。本部分對(duì)一般性最終用戶入罪化進(jìn)行了批判。一般性最終用戶進(jìn)行入罪化觀點(diǎn)不符合刑法的謙抑性要求,也脫離了現(xiàn)行刑法罪名體系。刑法的謙抑性要求只有在社會(huì)大眾眼里某種行為的社會(huì)危害性顯著到不能容忍時(shí),才可以考慮在刑事立法上對(duì)該種行為規(guī)定刑事處罰。一般性最終用戶使用盜版的行為不具有“營(yíng)利的目的”,不符合“違法所得數(shù)額較大”條件。另外,外國(guó)立法例不能成為我國(guó)借鑒的理由。 第五章為商業(yè)性最終用戶入罪化批判。本部分對(duì)主張商業(yè)性最終用戶入罪化觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了批判。商業(yè)性最終用戶入罪化觀點(diǎn)的兩大支柱理由是:“以營(yíng)利為目的”和“商業(yè)性使用行為”可以擴(kuò)張解釋。事實(shí)上,“以避免支出為目的”與“以營(yíng)利為目的”中的間接營(yíng)利具有本質(zhì)區(qū)別;“商業(yè)性使用行為”不能被納入到“復(fù)制行為”之中。另外,將機(jī)關(guān)、事業(yè)單位和社會(huì)團(tuán)體等最終用戶的商業(yè)性使用行為也納入刑事罪名體系有悖于寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)的刑事政策。 第六章為現(xiàn)行刑事政策視野中最終用問題的解決。本部分認(rèn)為,我國(guó)目前對(duì)著作權(quán)仍然采取弱保護(hù)的戰(zhàn)略,并且短期內(nèi)還不具備過渡到強(qiáng)保護(hù)的社會(huì)基礎(chǔ)和法治環(huán)境,因此,對(duì)追究商業(yè)性最終用戶追究刑事責(zé)任的問題可以作為一種前瞻性的探討,但是不宜進(jìn)入對(duì)現(xiàn)階段實(shí)施的現(xiàn)實(shí)性探討�，F(xiàn)階段強(qiáng)化知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的保護(hù)水平應(yīng)該是著眼于加大對(duì)商業(yè)性最終用戶使用盜版行為的司法適用力度。
[Abstract]:With the development of network technology, the behavior of the end users to use piracy has become a relatively prominent social phenomenon. This paper discusses whether the user should take legal responsibility and assume the legal responsibility for the use of piracy. The thesis is divided into the following five chapters:
The first chapter is an overview of the end user. This section provides an overview of the end user and end user involving the infringement of copyright. It is considered that the end user refers to the natural, legal, or other organizations, with the purpose of use, for the final consumption of copyrighted works, with the nature of universality, usability, terminal and unqualification. The behavior of the end user involving copyright infringement means that the end user, without the permission of the copyright owner, uses the infringed replicas or the end user beyond the permission of the copyright owner, and uses the acts of copyright works, which have the characteristics of concealment, high incidence, diversity of means and public tolerance.
The second chapter is the point of view that the end user does not bear criminal responsibility. This part combs the viewpoint that the end user should not bear the criminal responsibility. The view that the end user should not bear the criminal responsibility is divided into the disclaimer theory, the beneficial theory and the civil liability theory in three theoretical forms. The disclaimer thinks that the end user uses the pirated line In order to be exempt from legal responsibility, the beneficial theory holds that the end user's use of piracy is positive, not only should not take legal responsibility, but can be encouraged. The civil liability theory holds that the end user's use of piracy is at most only involving civil liability.
The third chapter is the point of view that the end user should be responsible for the criminal responsibility. This part introduces the view that the end user should be responsible for the criminal responsibility. According to the different subject scope of the criminal responsibility, the end user should be responsible for the criminal responsibility and all end-users should be responsible for criminal responsibility and commercial end user. There are two theoretical forms of responsibility. The view of the full accountability extends the criminal responsibility to all end-users; the point of distinction advocates that the criminal responsibility for the use of piracy for the end user is limited to the commercial end user.
The fourth chapter is the criticism of the incriminalization of the general end user. This part criticizes the incriminalization of the general end user. The general end user's incriminalization view does not conform to the humility requirement of the criminal law, and is divorced from the current criminal law system. The modest requirement of the criminal law is only the social harm of some behavior in the eyes of the public. When sex is not tolerable, it is possible to consider criminal penalties for this kind of act in criminal legislation. The general end user's use of piracy does not have the "purpose of profit" and does not conform to the "large amount of illegal income". In addition, foreign legislation can not be a reason for our country to learn from.
The fifth chapter is the critique of the incriminalization of commercial end users. This part criticizes the point of view of the incriminalization of commercial end users. The two main reasons for the incriminalization of commercial end users are that "for profit making" and "commercial use behavior" can be expanded to explain. In fact, "to avoid expenditure as the purpose" and " The indirect profit in profit for profit has essential difference; "commercial use behavior" can not be incorporated into the "duplication behavior". In addition, the commercial use behavior of the end users, such as organs, institutions and social groups, is also included in the criminal policy which is contrary to the leniency of the criminal offense.
The sixth chapter is the solution to the final use of the current criminal policy. In this part, we think that our country still adopts a strategy of weak protection for copyright, and does not have the social basis and the rule of law in the short term. Therefore, the question of investigating the criminal responsibility for commercial final users can be considered as a prospect. It is not suitable to explore the reality of the current implementation. At this stage, the level of strengthening the protection of intellectual property rights should be focused on increasing the judicial application of the use of piracy for commercial end users.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D924;D923.41

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張志強(qiáng);盜版的正反功能分析[J];編輯之友;2005年02期

2 張明楷;論刑法的謙抑性[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1995年04期

3 黃京平;;和諧社會(huì)語(yǔ)境下的刑法學(xué)新思維[J];法學(xué)家;2007年01期

4 于志剛;李懷勝;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪危害性的公眾認(rèn)知異化及其反思[J];貴州民族學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年05期

5 孫萬懷;侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)犯罪刑事責(zé)任基礎(chǔ)構(gòu)造比較[J];華東政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年02期

6 陳慶安;;侵犯著作權(quán)行為的刑事法分析[J];河南社會(huì)科學(xué);2006年02期

7 王瑞,吳惒光,王素娟;論著作權(quán)的刑法保護(hù)[J];檢察實(shí)踐;2005年01期

8 常青;;論軟件最終用戶侵犯著作權(quán)之刑事責(zé)任[J];科技與法律;2006年02期

9 劉明江;;論知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)水平——以國(guó)家知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)戰(zhàn)略為視野[J];昆明理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年03期

10 張娜;;當(dāng)前中國(guó)盜版問題的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[J];蘭州學(xué)刊;2008年10期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 孫祥壯;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法治構(gòu)造的理論邏輯[D];南京師范大學(xué);2007年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 孔維剛;我國(guó)國(guó)家知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)戰(zhàn)略發(fā)展動(dòng)態(tài)評(píng)析[D];貴州師范大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2006132