| 郑成思案的法律分析 |
| Alternative Title | The Legal Analyzed of Zheng cheng-si Case
|
| 李楠 |
| Subtype | 硕士
|
| Thesis Advisor | 马明贤
|
| 2010-05-13
|
| Degree Grantor | 兰州大学
|
| Place of Conferral | 兰州
|
| Degree Name | 硕士
|
| Keyword | 经补正的公证文书
著作权合理使用
著作权侵权
侵权损害赔偿数额
|
| Abstract | 20世纪90年代，随着计算机、网络通信、多媒体技术的飞速发展，极大地促进与推动了数字图书馆在世界各国的发展。然而，数字图书馆在飞速发展的同时，却引发了诸多涉及数字图书馆的侵权纠纷案件。网络环境下的著作权人的权益保护问题，以至于版权保护与社会公众的信息资源共享需求之间的矛盾与冲突日益尖锐，因此如何平衡两者之间的利益冲突成为法学界与图书馆界共同关注的课题。本文拟通过对郑成思起诉北京书生数字技术有限公司侵犯其著作权案进行分析，探讨数字图书馆的出路和网络环境下的著作权合理使用制度的完善，以期为版权的适度保护与社会公众对信息的充分获取寻求一种途径。
通过仔细研究案例，找出本案的争议焦点。笔者认为，在该案中存在三个争议焦点：一是经补正的公证文书是否具有法律效力？二是书生数字图书馆对郑成思作品的使用构成对著作权的合理使用还是侵犯著作权的行为？三是侵权损害赔偿数适用法律是否正确？针对本案的第一个焦点，笔者认为应当撤销第09065号公证文书，由公证机关重新作出一个新的公证文书。针对本案的第二个焦点，笔者首先对北京书生数字技术有限公司的性质进行分析，认定其是以营利为目的的企业法人，推出其经营的数字图书馆也是以营利为目的，否认其公益性；接着从著作权合理使用的角度进行分析，否认其是合理使用；再从侵犯著作构成要件的角度进行分析，认为其构成侵犯著作权的行为。针对本案的第三个焦点，通过对传统著作权侵权与侵犯信息网络传播权进行比较，认为传统著作权侵权所适用的法定稿酬标准作为郑成思的损害赔偿标准是不适宜的。笔者针对本案进行了两方面的思考：一是数字图书馆取得授权的出路在哪里？笔者认为，应当求助于著作权集体管理组织。二是对著作权合理使用制度的重新认识。笔者认为，应将《著作权法》第二十二条和《条例》第六条增加一兜底条款“以及其他属于合理使用的情形”；网络环境下著作权合理使用的标准进行重新认定。 |
| Other Abstract | In the1990s, with the rapid development of computer, network communications and multimedia technology, it greatly facilitated and promoted the digital library development in the world. However, along with the rapid development of digital libraries, it brought on an enormous infringement disputes involved in digital library. In the environment of network and digital, the conflicts between the public demand for information and the protection of author’s copyright are increasingly acute, so how to balance the conflict of interest becomes the law issues of common concern. This paper by analyzing the case of Zheng Cheng-si investigates the outlet of digital libraries and the perfection of Copyright Fair Use in the networks, wishing to find a path to balance between the appropriate protection for the copyright and the public access to information.
Studying the case, the author identify the focus .Three focus as follows: First, whether the correction of the notarized documents the force of law? Second, the digital library use of Zheng Cheng-si work is a reasonable use of copyright or copyright infringement? Third, the legal basis for the amount of tort damages is correct? For the first focus, the author believes that No. 09065 certification should be revoked and the notary public notarized a new instrument. For the second focus, the author firstly analyzes the nature of Beijing Digital Technology Co., Ltd and identify it is a corporation, so its digital library is also operated for profit ,to deny the public welfare; then analyzing from the perspective of copyright fair use , denied reasonable use; finally analyzing from the perspective of copyright infringement ,maintaining it. For the third the focus, comparing information Network Transmission Right Infringement to the traditional copyright infringement , it is inappropriate to for remuneration of the standard statutory damages .Finally, the case triggers thinking: where is the outlet to digital library? Resort to copyright collective management organization; In my opinion, it should add a legal provision: "and the other belongs to the rational use of the case"; the standard of Copyright fair use re-identified. |
| URL | 查看原文
|
| Language | 中文
|
| Document Type | 学位论文
|
| Identifier | https://ir.lzu.edu.cn/handle/262010/201844
|
| Collection | 法学院
|
Recommended Citation
GB/T 7714 |
李楠. 郑成思案的法律分析[D]. 兰州. 兰州大学,2010.
|
Items in the repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
