检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:王迁[1]
出 处:《法学论坛》2008年第6期37-42,共6页Legal Forum
基 金:上海市教育委员会曙光学者项目课题<网络环境中著作权侵权比较研究>的成果之一
摘 要:我国《著作权法》规定了"汇编权"。但这是立法者错误理解《伯尔尼公约》的结果,世界上绝大多数国家和地区的立法均未单独规定"汇编权"。"汇编权"不仅在适用范围上与"复制权"重复,没有给著作权人带来任何新的利益,而且给法院增加了不必要的负担,迫使法院去审查被控侵权人汇集原告作品的成果是否形成了新作品,并导致司法实践的混乱。因此,应当对"汇编权"进行重构,将其改造为在公共集会上的讲话者许可他人汇集其讲话的权利。China Copyright Law accords copyright owners the right of compilation. But such a right is the result of Chinese legislators' misunderstanding Article 2bis (3) in Berne Convention, and most countries' copyright law does not contain the right. The right of compilation overlaps with the right of reproduction and does not bring any extra benefit to copyright owners. In addition, it results in unnecessary burden on judges since they are forced to carefully review whether or not the accused infringer' s act of making collection of the copyright owner's works forms new compilation work. Therefore, the fight of compilation should be reconstructed to a right enjoyed by the author of public speech to cover the act of exploiting the collection of his public speeches.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.227