請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/67250
標題: | 非法影音內容提供者之著作權責任—以歐美及我國實務觀點為中心 The Copyright Liability of Illicit Content Provider: A Comparative Study of the United States, European Union and Taiwan |
作者: | Jui-Sz Lin 林睿思 |
指導教授: | 謝銘洋(Ming-Yan Shieh) |
關鍵字: | 間接侵權,擬制侵害,機上盒,應用程式,超連結, secondary liability,legal fiction,set-top-box,app,hyperlink, |
出版年 : | 2020 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 科技的發展使得應用程式(下稱APP)與機上盒推陳出新,方便公眾透過這些媒介取得網路影音服務。然而,上述APP與機上盒所提供之影音內容並不總是經過授權而合法,多有業者以「透過APP或機上盒向公眾提供外部非法影音內容」的方式獲利,因而對著作權人之經濟利益造成可觀的影響。自近年來我國法院判決觀之,對於「透過APP或機上盒提供外部非法影音內容」能否受到既有著作權法、民法以及刑法規範存在爭議,法院見解也存在分歧,著作權人主張權利面臨困難。在此背景下,我國立法院於西元2019年新增著作權法第87條第1項第8款擬制侵害著作權之規定,並修正著作權法第87條第2項與第93條第4款,規範透過電腦程式匯集侵權著作網路位置受有利益之行為。適逢歐盟法院與美國法院同樣發生與我國實務近似之機上盒侵害著作權紛爭,值得觀察。歐盟法院的審理觀點雖與美國法院有所不同,卻可以發現外國法院亦有禁止透過機上盒提供外部非法影音內容的趨勢。本研究認為,藉由外國實務判決內容之分析,應能有助於檢視我國去年新增之著作權法第87條第1項第8款擬制侵害著作權之規定在要件上是否過於嚴格,以致於對著作權人之保護不如預期,而有檢討之空間。 With the development of technology, copyright disputes regarding apps and set-top-boxes which are able to lead customers to illicit content (works which are unauthorized by right-holders and thus infringing copyright) are increasingly emerging. Due to the fact that apps providers as well as set-top-box distributors are not the ones who uploaded videos to the public without authorization, some courts in Taiwan found it hard to hold that such acts infringed the right-holders’ right of public transmission. Considering those who make profits through collecting links and accesses to illicit works and providing them to the public may do harm to the right-holders, the Legislation Yuan of Taiwan has enacted item 8 of paragraph 1 of Article 87 of Copyright Act in 2019 with an aim to ban these illegal acts. This new legislation indicates that “knowning providing the public with computer programs which have aggregated the Internet Protocol Addresses of infringing works and receiving financial gain shall be deemed an infringement of copyright.” Similar disputes have also been discussed in European Court of Justice and the U.S. district courts. The former has launched its opinion about whether the distribution of streaming devices such as Kodi boxes shall be liable for copyright infringement. The latter employ inducing theory among copyright case law to deal with the similar issue. Both of them present a tendency to prohibit such illegal acts. By analyzing and comparing these cases, this study examines if the 2019 legislation in Taiwanese Copyright Act to some extend restricts flexibility and should be further revised. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/67250 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202003582 |
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 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-1608202014532700.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.74 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。