【摘要】：回溯考究其歷史,早已有《紅樓夢》后二十章回高鶚的續(xù)寫以及魯迅對神話作品的續(xù)寫等。直到我國對知識產(chǎn)權的舶來,讓續(xù)寫作品的法律性質問題初現(xiàn)端倪。于是90年代知識產(chǎn)權學術界開始反思、界定,但是仍然沒有達成一致的通說。并且基于當時信息的不發(fā)達,讓續(xù)寫作品的傳播受限,以至于續(xù)寫作品是否侵權問題無人問津與重視。隨著時代科技的發(fā)展,網(wǎng)絡成為信息傳播的有效途徑。特別是網(wǎng)絡原創(chuàng)小說的發(fā)展,滋生了續(xù)寫作品的空間,間接鼓勵了網(wǎng)民對自己喜愛的連載作品進行搶先續(xù)寫的行為。于是利益的沖突異常激烈地在盛大起點網(wǎng)與受讀吧網(wǎng)間展開,也拉開了對于續(xù)寫作品問題的“戰(zhàn)爭”。社會界人士有的認為是抄襲,有的認為是基于原著之上擴展的原創(chuàng)作品。而法律界人士則從著作權制度和不正當競爭的角度辨析續(xù)寫行為。有的學者認為其侵犯了保護作品完整權,是破壞作品完整性的一種特殊方式;有的認為其侵犯了虛擬人物的形象權;認為續(xù)寫作品侵犯了原作的名稱權,應通過保護作品的名稱保護原作者的權利;有的認為其不屬于合理使用的范圍;有的認為其是屬于演繹權規(guī)制范圍;有的認為其根本就不構成侵權,甚者從不正當競爭的角度解讀續(xù)寫行為。續(xù)寫作品的層出不窮反而更加反映了文藝界的繁榮程度,從法律的角度調(diào)整續(xù)寫是違背著作權立法根本目的的行為。高潮迭起的爭論如火如荼最根本原因也在于現(xiàn)行著作權法對此行為并無明確規(guī)定,讓問題的凸顯與解決機制之間高度不對稱,至此矛盾日益突出。法律的責任和其存在的價值就在于對社會現(xiàn)象問題的調(diào)整以及沖突的解決。其在知識產(chǎn)權領域尤為突出。智力成果是隨著科技的發(fā)展而不斷進步,知識產(chǎn)權制度的構建必須跟上時代的步伐。因此,因此,填補著作權法對續(xù)寫行為的空缺迫在眉睫。 本文分為四部分: 第一部分:案例引導;本論文將舉出國內(nèi)國外兩個典型案例。聚焦爭議點,從而提出討論的中心問題—續(xù)寫作品是否侵權;同時,梳理續(xù)寫行為所帶來的負面影響,從問題的解析深入了解和探究該問題的本質。 第二部分:基礎理論;將對續(xù)寫作品的概念、特征、類型進行歸納總結。主要通過辨析的方式,對比現(xiàn)有提出的學者觀點,提出自己的論點。 第三部分:侵權探討;續(xù)寫行為是否侵權,現(xiàn)今學界仍然無通說。因此,該部分以列舉的方式梳理各類觀點,最終突出自己的想法。而邏輯的起點以原著作品與續(xù)寫作品間的形似比較:其是思想相似還是表達相似;是否具有合理使用的抗辯理由。其次,如果上述條件滿足,論證其符合著作權保護的作品的情況下,該續(xù)寫作品是否侵犯了原著作者的其他著作權。 第四部分:簡單構想;最后,對續(xù)寫作者的權益與原著作者的權益進行對照權衡,公平合理的進行權利設置,解決續(xù)寫行為帶來的著作權糾紛。
[Abstract]:Looking back on its history, there has been a sequel to the later 20 chapters of the Dream of the Red Mansions and Lu Xun's continuation of mythological works. Until the import of intellectual property rights, let the legal nature of the continuation of the work. So intellectual property academia began to reflect on, define, but still did not reach agreement. And based on the underdevelopment of information at that time, the dissemination of the continued works is limited, so that whether the infringement of the continued works is ignored. With the development of science and technology, the network becomes an effective way to spread information. In particular, the development of original novels on the Internet breeds space for the continuation of works, and indirectly encourages netizens to preempt the sequel of their favorite serial works. So the conflict of interest between the Shanda starting point and the read-out network, also opened the issue of the continuation of the "war." Some members of the community believe that plagiarism, some are based on the original work expansion of the original work. But the legal profession personage from the copyright system and the unfair competition angle discriminates the continuation behavior. Some scholars think that it infringes the right to protect the integrity of the work, which is a special way to destroy the integrity of the work; others think that it infringes the image right of the virtual character; and that the continuation of the work infringes the right of the name of the original work, The rights of the original author should be protected by protecting the title of the work; some think that it does not belong to the scope of reasonable use; some think it belongs to the scope of deductive right regulation; others think that it does not constitute an infringement at all. Even from the point of view of unfair competition interpretation of sequel behavior. On the contrary, the endless emergence of continuous works reflects the prosperity of the literary and art circles. It is against the fundamental purpose of copyright legislation to adjust the continuation from the angle of law. The root cause of the rising controversy is that the current copyright law does not clearly stipulate this behavior, which makes the problem highlight and solve the mechanism of a high degree of asymmetry, so that the contradiction is becoming more and more prominent. The responsibility of law and its value lies in the adjustment of social phenomena and the settlement of conflicts. It is especially prominent in the field of intellectual property. With the development of science and technology, the construction of intellectual property system must keep pace with the times. Therefore, it is urgent to fill the gap in copyright law. This paper is divided into four parts: the first part: case guidance, this paper will cite two typical cases at home and abroad. Focusing on the controversial points, this paper puts forward the central issue of discussion-whether the continuation of the work is infringing; at the same time, combing the negative effects of the sequel behavior, and deeply understanding and exploring the nature of the problem from the analysis of the problem. The second part: basic theory, will summarize the concept, characteristics and types of the continued works. Mainly through the way of discrimination, compared with the existing scholars point of view, put forward their own arguments. The third part: torts; whether the continuation of the act of infringement, there is still no reason for the academic community. Therefore, this part combs each kind of viewpoint in the enumeration way, finally highlights own idea. The logical starting point is the similarity comparison between the original works and the continued works: is it ideological or expressive similarity, and whether there is a reasonable use of the defense. Secondly, if the above conditions are satisfied, it is proved that if the work conforms to the copyright protection, the continuation works may infringe the other copyright of the original author. The fourth part: simple idea; finally, the author's rights and interests are compared with the original author's rights and interests, fair and reasonable to set up the right to solve the copyright disputes caused by the continuation of the act.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D923.41

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前8條

1 孫靜;;續(xù)寫作品著作權問題研究[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2008年10期

2 李亮,王靜;論續(xù)寫作品的著作權保護[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學院學報;2005年01期

3 李亮;論續(xù)寫作品的著作權保護[J];河北法學;2005年02期

4 孫國瑞;續(xù)寫作品及有關問題研究[J];科技與法律;1994年03期

5 金渝林;論作品的獨創(chuàng)性[J];法學研究;1995年04期

6 易繼明;評財產(chǎn)權勞動學說[J];法學研究;2000年03期

7 李雨峰,王玫黎;保護作品完整權的重構——對我國著作權法相關條款的質疑[J];法學論壇;2003年02期

8 權彥敏;徐正大;;從兩則版權案例談續(xù)寫作品的合理使用[J];中國出版;2010年19期

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 孫鵬;物權公示論[D];西南政法大學;2003年

，

本文編號：2291572