請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/28831
標題: | 著作鄰接權之研究──以表演人、錄音物製作人及廣播事業之保護為中心 A Study on Neighboring Right──Focus on the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations |
作者: | Hsin-Tsu Kao 高訢慈 |
指導教授: | 蔡明誠(Ming-Cheng Tsai) |
關鍵字: | 著作鄰接權,表演人,錄音物製作人,廣播事業,著作人法系,著作權法系,原創性,創作性,與貿易有關之智慧財產權協定, Neighboring Right,Performers,Producers of Phonograms,Broadcasting Organizations,Copyright System,Originality,Creativity,TRIPS, |
出版年 : | 2007 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 對於表演人、錄音物製作人及廣播事業之保護,在兩大法系間本即存在不同之規範方式。著作人法系依著作鄰接權加以保護;著作權法系則主要以著作權加以保護,並包含普通法上財產權、普通法上個人權利、不正競爭法及刑法。
我國著作權法對於表演與錄音之保護,由條文觀之,似乎採取著作權保護方式,但是,仍與一般著作權之內容不盡相同。相關之限制、排除或特別之規定,應如何為適當之解釋 ? 是否有意對於著作權保護方式加以區隔,而向著作鄰接權保護方式靠攏 ? 似乎不無疑問。加之並未設有對廣播事業成果之保護,是否亦有規範不足之 問題 ? 我國於2002年1月1日加入WTO,對於該組織所通過之條約,當然必需加以遵守,TRIPS第14條對於表演人、錄音物製作人及廣播事業特別設有保護規定,並於同條第6項明訂:「任何會員,對於第一項至第三項規定之權利,於羅馬公約允許之範圍內,得訂定權利之條件、限制、例外規定及保留條款。」因此,我國雖非羅馬公約之會員國,卻因TRIPS之規定,不得不對於羅馬公約等國際條約予以相應之尊重與研究,以其作為我國與WTO或其他國際組織交流之基礎。是以,值此契機,即有對於國際間以及各國立法例加以研究之需要,從而藉由比較各國法律規範及實務運作,使我國能不外於國際社會之趨勢,並期為我國相關法規範之建立尋求依據。 本文運用比較法學之方法,由表演人、錄音物製作人及廣播事業之相關國際規範著手,並分別探討英國、美國、德國、日本立法例之異同,再對我國現行規定加以檢討,分析其利弊得失,最後試提出建議。 There are different kinds of norms between “the author’s right system” and “the copyright system” on the protection of performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations. The author’s right system has used neighboring right to protect their performances, phonograms and broadcasting while the copyright system has used copyright mainly to protect them and also cover common-law property right, personal right, unfair competition and criminal law. Looking into the articles of the R.O.C. copyright law about the protection of performances and phonograms, it seems that we adopt the copyright approach. But, examining the contents of these articles, it is still different from other types of property rights of copyrighted works. How can we appropriately explain these limitations, exclusions or special treatments? Does it mean distinct from the copyright approach, and tend towards the neighboring right approach? Furthermore, there is no protection for the contribution of broadcasting organizations. Does it necessary to draw up some norms to protect them? Taiwan has entered into the WTO on January, 1 2002. As a member, we have to follow the WTO related conventions. Article 14 of the TRIPS has regulated the protection of performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations. The paragraph 6 of article 14 has provided:” Any Member may, in relation to the rights conferred under paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, provide for conditions, limitations, exceptions and reservations to the extent permitted by the Rome Convention.” We are not the member of the Rome Convention in fact, but through the TRIPS, we still have to show our respect and do research on these international conventions as the basis of communication. At this moment, it is necessary to study the relevant approaches and theories of international society and major countries, and then seek to establish the justification theory and legal fundamental of our nation. Consequently, this research will adopt a comparative study method, beginning with a study of relevant international norms, focusing on the differences between the legal regimes of developed countries, including England, U.S.A., Germany, and Japan. The results of this study will be applied to examine the advantages and disadvantages of our present legislation, and to make amendment recommendations. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/28831 |
全文授權: | 有償授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-96-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.56 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。