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:姚万勤[1] YAO Wan-qin(School of Artificial Intelligence and Law,Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China)
机构地区:[1]西南政法大学人工智能法律研究院,重庆401120
出 处:《内蒙古社会科学》2022年第6期96-103,共8页Inner Mongolia Social Sciences
基 金:西南政法大学学科建设专项项目“中国特色刑法学话语体系的贡献和当代建构研究”(编号:xk202201)。
摘 要:根据我国刑法第217条的规定,侵犯著作权罪要求行为人主观上必须具有“营利目的”。然而,在数字版权时代到来之际,过于强调行为人主观上的营利目的,不仅徒增了司法机关在案件办理过程中的证明难度,而且极有可能放纵一些主观上不具有营利目的但客观上侵犯了著作权的行为。目前,有学者主张保留对该罪名的主观目的限定,另有学者主张可以放宽对该罪名的认定标准,并认为在网络环境下并不需要行为人具有营利的目的,但这些观点并不能为数字版权的保护提供充足的刑法规范依据。因此,通过修改刑法取消该罪名的“以营利为目的”的限定,不仅有利于减轻司法机关的证明负担、契合数字版权保护的特征,而且与国际社会的通行做法相一致,是未来针对这一问题较为妥当的解决方案。According to Article 217 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Law),the crime of infringing copyright requires that the perpetrator must have the subjective purpose of making profits.But,in the in the era of digital copyright,overemphasizing on the subjective purpose of the perpetrator not only makes it more difficult for the judiciary to prove the crime in the process of handling the case,but also is very likely to indulge some acts of copyright infringement that do not have the purpose of making profits but objectively infringe copyright.At present,some scholars advocate that the subjective purpose of this crime should be retained,while others argue that the identification standard of this crime could be relaxed and it's unnecessary for the perpetrator to have the purpose of making profits.However,these views have no sufficient support in the terms of Criminal Law for the protection of digital copyright.Therefore,through the revision of the Criminal Law,the restriction on the subjective purpose of make profits would be can celled when in determining the crime of copyright infringement.It will not only help to reduce the burden of proof by the judicial authorities and conform to the characteristics of digital copyright protection,but also be consistent with the common practice of the international community.The revision would be a more appropriate solution in the future.
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:216.73.216.49