孤兒著作利用困境與解決機制之研究

Abstract

因著作權人身分不明或失聯，導致利用人無法獲得著作權人授權之著作，在美國被稱為「孤兒著作」，而是否立法處理「孤兒著作」之問題，不只在美國引起關注，於歐盟亦為討論課題，加拿大、日本兩國更是早有法規因應，為了解決個別利用人面臨著作權人不明之困難，我國研議中之數位內容產業發展條例草案亦擬定相關規定。於此背景下，本文乃深入探討孤兒著作問題源起，並論述以現行著作權法如何處理該問題，進而檢視比較法例，反思我國立法上如何為宜，提出修正建議。 全文共分為六章，第一章為緒論。第二章釐清孤兒著作爭議產生緣由，說明數位科技之進步為一大原因，並透過分析美國著作權法之立法沿革，以及孤兒著作實務上相關判決，闡述著作權保護期間之延長，與登記制之變遷亦為影響主因，進而與我國現況相印證，指出不論在事實面與法規面，我國與美國均有類似之處，故不能不正視孤兒著作課題。第三章敘述目前國內存在的孤兒著作爭議，並整理參酌相關實務見解，說明倘適用著作權法中著作財產權、著作人格權之限制規定，或是侵害著作權責任中故意過失之判斷，解釋上孤兒著作利用人有可能免於著作權侵害之責，縱不能免責，法院亦得考量酌減賠償額。在刑事責任部分，著作權之侵害有屬非告訴乃論之罪者，然在孤兒著作情形，若檢察官未能舉證著作仍在著作權存續期間，法院得基於罪疑有利被告原則，認利用人並無刑責。第四章介紹分析美國孤兒著作草案，以及日本、加拿大之孤兒著作規定，從而比較出各國立法上差異，如美國法例為損害賠償限制規定，利用孤兒著作不須經主管機關審查，於著作權人出面有所爭議時，始利用訴訟解決，損害賠償額以「合理」為限，通常相當於合理授權金。日本、加拿大法例則為強制授權規定，利用孤兒著作須經主管機關審查，並提存使用報酬，均可供立法借鏡。第五章為立法論，先說明國內現有著作權授權機制不足以處理孤兒著作課題，立法有其必要，並以數位內容產業發展條例草案之孤兒著作立法為探討核心，分析所採強制授權立法模式應值肯定，並就孤兒著作立法體例、法規適用範圍、利用人搜尋義務內涵、使用報酬之計算與提存、強制授權處分之救濟途徑，參酌比較法上作法為探討，進而指出體例上應將孤兒著作立法納入著作權法規範，法規要件上應刪除目前草案「為製作數位內容」之限制，並肯認未公開發表著作亦得適用孤兒著作強制授權規定，此外應明訂使用報酬由主管機關個案認定，不須另訂使用報酬之詳細計算方式。第六章為結論，總結各章論述，並擬定具體之修正條文，期能對孤兒著作問題之解決有所助益。

The works whose copyright cannot be authorized to others due to the fact that the owners of the works cannot be identified or located are termed “orphan works” in the U.S. Whether it is necessary to enact laws to deal with “orphan works” is not only paid attention to in the U.S. but also widely discussed in the European Union. Canada and Japan have pioneered in legislating laws for orphan works. To solve the problem surrounding copyrighted works with unidentifiable owners, the bill concerning the act for the development of digital content industry has been drafted in our nation. Motivated by this background, this study aimed to explore the orphan works issue and discoursed how the current Copyright Act applies to such issue. Through law comparison, this study also probed into how the law should be enacted in our nation.

This paper comprised six chapters. The first chapter was an introduction of this research. The second chapter clarified the origin of the orphan works issue and explained why the issue was mainly stemmed from the advancement of digital technology. By analyzing the evolution of the U.S. Copyright Law and practical cases involving orphan works, this study argued that extension of copyright terms and reform of copyright registration are also factors causing orphan works. In a further comparison, similarities could be found between the U.S. and our nation in the factual and legal aspects. Therefore, the orphan works issue cannot be overlooked. The third chapter introduced the domestic disputes over orphan works and provided practical perspectives to explain that, due to the limitations on copyrights in Copyright Act or lack of intent or negligence, users of orphan works are either exempted from copyright infringement liability or, if not fully exempted, may be judged by the court to pay a reduced compensation. In the aspect of criminal liability, in a copyright infringement case that is not a crime indictable only upon complaint, if the prosecutor fails to provide evidence for the validity of the copyright of the orphan work, in pursuant to “in dubio pro reo”, the user may be deemed free from any criminal liability. The fourth chapter analyzed the U.S. Orphan Works Act of 2006 and precedents in Japan and Canada to compare the difference in legislation. For instance, the U.S. regulations set limitations on remedies in cases involving orphan works. Users of orphan works are required to resolve the dispute in court only when the copyright owner declares his right and are subject to pay a reasonable compensation, which is generally equivalent to the reasonable royalty. Regulations in Japan and Canada are based on the compulsory license model, requiring the competent authority to approve the compulsory license and users of orphan works to deposit compensation. All these precedents can serve as a reference for a domestic act. The fifth chapter focused on the legislation of the act. First of all, this study explained that the current licensing mechanism for use of copyrighted work is not applicable to the orphan works issue, and enacting a new act is imperative. The bill concerning the act for the development of digital content industry is based on the compulsory license model and should be supported. The legal instances, applicability of the bill, user’s search obligation, calculation and deposit of compensation, and remedy procedures for compulsory license were compared with precedents to further point out that regulations governing orphan works should be included in the Copyright Act. The limited applicability of the current bill to only the “production of digital content” should be revised, and unpublished works should also apply to the compulsory license regulations for orphan works. In addition, compensation for use of orphan works should also be clearly regulated for the authority concerned to determine proper compensations case by case, so that a uniform calculation method may not be necessary. The final chapter concluded the above chapters and proposed substantive suggestions to hopefully help resolve the orphan works issue.