本文選題：大規(guī)模數(shù)字化 + 合理適用��； 參考：《河南財經(jīng)政法大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：高昂的交易成本是困擾大規(guī)模數(shù)字化著作權(quán)授權(quán)的主要因素。一方面大規(guī)模數(shù)字化往往需要取得海量授權(quán),一對一的授權(quán)成本太高;另一方面需要數(shù)字化的作品往往經(jīng)濟價值不高,有些甚至是脫銷作品、孤兒作品,收益太低。高成本低收益使得大規(guī)模數(shù)字化寸步難行。即使是財力雄厚的谷歌公司也只能鋌而走險,冒險掃描受著作權(quán)保護的圖書。谷歌圖書掃描項目的著作權(quán)侵權(quán)訴訟戲劇性的彰顯了大規(guī)模數(shù)字化著作權(quán)授權(quán)困境,案件的審理一波三折,被否決的和解協(xié)議以及最后的合理使用判決都留下了司法實踐的探討足跡。案件的審理同時引發(fā)了學界和實務界的研究熱潮,法定許可、強制性許可、延伸性集體管理、默示許可、著作權(quán)集體管理、合理使用作為解決大規(guī)模數(shù)字化解決著作權(quán)難題的可能選項被反復討論。降低交易成本是解決大規(guī)模數(shù)字化著作權(quán)難題的基本要求。因此有必要探討影響大規(guī)模數(shù)字化成本收益的主要因素,分析比較可能的規(guī)制選項對成本收益的影響,最后結(jié)合國情找到解決的方法。我國在解決大規(guī)模數(shù)字化困境問題中要堅持以下三個原則,利益平衡、效率原則以及尊重國情。要解決大規(guī)模數(shù)字化著作權(quán)難題最主要的是堅持利益平衡原則,解決掃描機構(gòu)與文字作品著作權(quán)人之間的利益沖突問題。而且對可能的規(guī)制選項進行選擇時必須能有效提升掃描機構(gòu)掃描的效率和獲得授權(quán)的效率。而所有選項的選擇在學習國外先進經(jīng)驗的同時必須要以我國現(xiàn)階段的法律現(xiàn)實國情為基礎,最優(yōu)秀的做法是在我國現(xiàn)有的法律基礎上進行有效的改革。針對規(guī)制選項的具體討論最終選出適合我國國情的三種解決方案:第一,改革合理使用規(guī)則;基于我國現(xiàn)有的合理使用規(guī)則的立法傳統(tǒng),依舊采取列舉式,將各種合理使用的情形明確列舉出來,但同時必須有相關的彈性條款即構(gòu)成合理使用必須是為了滿足廣大使用者的公共利益,而不是單純的追求經(jīng)濟利益。第二,改革法定許可制度;具體而言就是,對于法定許可支付費用的要求,建立著作權(quán)補償金制度,明確規(guī)定補償金的支付標準并且規(guī)定費用由統(tǒng)一的集體管理組織收取。同時規(guī)定大規(guī)模數(shù)字化具有公益性的圖書作品實行法定許可從而達到提升授權(quán)效率的目的。第三,引進延伸集體管理制度,由中國文字著作權(quán)協(xié)會作為集體管理組織,對孤兒作品進行集體許可,使用者在獲得許可時必須表明使用是否以營利性為目的,以營利為目的就要立即支付賠償費用,支付的款項由文著協(xié)代為收取。
[Abstract]:The high transaction cost is the main factor that puzzles the large-scale digital copyright authorization. On the one hand large-scale digitalization often needs to obtain massive authorization and the cost of one-to-one authorization is too high; on the other hand works that need digitization are often of low economic value some of which are even out of stock and orphan works have too low income. High cost and low income make it difficult to digitize on a large scale. Even deep-pocketed Google can only risk scanning copyrighted books. The copyright infringement lawsuit of the Google Book scanning Project has dramatically highlighted the dilemma of large-scale digital copyright authorization, and the trial of the case has experienced a series of twists and turns. The rejected settlement agreement and the final fair use judgment have left a trail of judicial practice. The trial of the case also triggered a research boom in the academic and practical circles, including legal permission, compulsory licensing, extended collective management, implied licensing, collective copyright management, Rational use is discussed repeatedly as a possible option to solve the problem of copyright in large-scale digitization. Reducing transaction cost is the basic requirement to solve the problem of large-scale digital copyright. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the main factors that affect the cost and income of large-scale digitization, to analyze and compare the possible regulation options on the cost and income, and finally to find the solution according to the national conditions. In solving the problem of large-scale digitization, China should adhere to the following three principles: balance of interests, principle of efficiency and respect for national conditions. In order to solve the problem of large-scale digital copyright, the most important thing is to adhere to the principle of balance of interests and to solve the conflict of interest between the scanning organization and the copyright owner of the text works. Moreover, the possible regulatory options must be able to effectively improve the scanning efficiency and the efficiency of authorization. The choice of all options must be based on the current legal reality of our country while learning foreign advanced experience, and the best way is to carry out effective reform on the basis of the existing laws of our country. According to the specific discussion of the regulation options, three solutions suitable for China's national conditions are finally selected: first, to reform the rules of rational use; based on the existing legislative tradition of the rules of reasonable use in our country, we still take the enumeration formula. All kinds of reasonable use situations are clearly listed, but at the same time there must be relevant flexible clauses, that is, reasonable use must be made to satisfy the public interests of the vast number of users, but not simply to pursue economic interests. Second, reform the legal license system; specifically, for the requirement of legal license payment fee, establish the copyright compensation system, specify the payment standard of compensation and stipulate that the fee shall be collected by the unified collective management organization. At the same time, it prescribes that large-scale digital books and works with public welfare should be licensed by law to improve the efficiency of authorization. Third, the introduction of an extended collective management system, with the Chinese text copyright Association as the collective management organization, for the purpose of collective licensing of orphan works, and the user must indicate when obtaining the license whether the use is for profit or not. For profit, the payment of compensation is made immediately, and the payment is received by the Literary Association.
【學位授予單位】：河南財經(jīng)政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.41

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 張麗媛;孟曉嬌;王凱;夏夢杰;;谷歌數(shù)字圖書館8年版權(quán)糾紛研究分析[J];科技情報開發(fā)與經(jīng)濟;2015年15期

2 熊琦;;著作權(quán)延伸性集體管理制度何為[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2015年06期

3 姚鶴徽;;谷歌數(shù)字圖書館著作權(quán)合理使用問題研究[J];圖書館工作與研究;2015年01期

4 熊琦;;大規(guī)模數(shù)字化與著作權(quán)集體管理制度創(chuàng)新[J];法商研究;2014年02期

5 萬慕晨;;我國數(shù)字圖書館著作權(quán)研究綜述[J];農(nóng)業(yè)圖書情報學刊;2010年10期

6 趙懷忠;;谷歌“侵權(quán)門”事件解析[J];當代傳播;2010年05期

7 葉再春;;谷歌“數(shù)字圖書館”背后的著作權(quán)保護難題[J];東南傳播;2010年05期

8 呂炳斌;;反思著作權(quán)法——從Google數(shù)字圖書館說起[J];圖書館雜志;2007年05期

9 趙靜;;從司法審判看我國數(shù)字圖書館建設中的著作權(quán)法律適用問題[J];科技與法律;2005年03期

10 陳萬忠;關于數(shù)字圖書館著作權(quán)問題的研究[J];圖書館理論與實踐;2005年03期

相關重要報紙文章 前1條

1 阮開欣;;美國法院為何判定谷歌數(shù)字圖書不侵權(quán)？[N];中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)報;2016年

相關博士學位論文 前2條

1 姜福曉;數(shù)字網(wǎng)絡技術(shù)背景下著作權(quán)法的困境與出路[D];對外經(jīng)濟貿(mào)易大學;2014年

2 幸秋妙;數(shù)字時代下有關圖書館著作權(quán)限制規(guī)定研究[D];中國政法大學;2011年

相關碩士學位論文 前3條

1 吳丹;論版權(quán)制度下的“孤兒作品”問題[D];中國政法大學;2011年

2 趙婧;數(shù)字圖書館涉及的著作權(quán)法律問題研究[D];四川大學;2006年

3 趙金一;數(shù)字圖書館引發(fā)的著作權(quán)法思考[D];中國社會科學院研究生院;2003年

，

本文編號：1889679