论“知识产权”概念的科学性——关于权利对象的本体探究  

The Scientificity of the Concept of IP: Inquiry on the Nature of Subject Matter of Rights

作　　者：熊文聪[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学凯原法学院 [2]中央民族大学

出　　处：《知识产权》2013年第7期9-18,共10页Intellectual Property

基　　金："教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地中国人民大学民商事法律科学研究中心自主项目"(编号:13MSFJD82003);"中国博士后科学基金面上资助"(编号:2013M531159)阶段性研究成果

摘　　要：学界普遍认为知识产权并非一个清晰的法学概念,并将其原因归咎于难以归纳出其权利对象之一般,而权利对象又是划分对世权的基石。与物权、人格权不同,围绕知识产权对象之本体,存在无形(体)财产说、智力成果说、信息说、知识说、符号说等诸多争论,这些学说是否科学自洽,是否存在可以互通的共性,理应诉诸细致的逻辑推敲与澄明的哲学探问。借由信息论、语言学、传播学等学科之原理与方法,会发现差异是知识产权对象的本质,而其特征在于非实体性、可复制性及意义与边界的不确定性,这些自然属性决定了知识产权法中的一些特有概念与规则,但并非评判知识产权正当与否的根本依据。区分事实命题与价值命题,有助于我们找到解题的关键。Attributing to lacking the connotation of subject matters, critics hold that intellectual property is not a clear legal concept. Subject matter is the criteria to distinguishing the rights in rem. Differing from real right and moral right, there are many theories about the nature of the subject matter of IP, such as intangible property theory, intellectual work theory, information theory, knowledge theory and sign theory. Are these theories scientific and self-consistent？ Are there any commonality linking up these theories？ It should be answered through detailed logical reasoning and clear philosophic inquiry. Depending on the rationales and methods of information theory, linguistics and communications, it can concluded that difference is the nature of the subject matter of IP and characterizes incorporeality, duplicability and uncertainty on its meaning and boundary. These features give rise to some special concepts and rules in IP laws, but they are not the basis judging the legitimacy of IR Making distinction between fact issue and value issue will be helpful to find the key point of settlement.

关 键 词：法学概念 知识产权对象 体系化 事实与价值二分 

分 类 号：D913[政治法律—民商法学]