“反规避条款”中知识产权与公众信息自由的冲突与平衡  

The Conflict and Balance Between Intellectual Property Rights and Public Freedom of Information in the“Anti-circumvention Clause”

作　　者：龚珊珊 严小翔 Gong Shanshan;Yan Xiaoxiang

机构地区：[1]东南大学法学院 [2]澳门大学,中国澳门

出　　处：《人权》2023年第5期149-165,共17页Human Rights

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目“网络服务商刑事责任边界及体系构建研究”(项目编号:18BFX104)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：知识产权与公众信息自由的冲突长期存在。“反规避条款”的不断发展造成了冲突加剧。信息自由作为一项基本人权,正逐步被知识产权的扩张所侵蚀。已有研究主要从消极保护路径进行利益平衡,但积极保护路径更有利于实现公众信息自由,缓解两权冲突。实践中,与“反规避条款”适用相关的利益失衡案例,存在技术保护措施的目的合法性、受保护部分的区分及规避行为的认定的问题。这主要是理论上对技术措施使用者的限制不足、未能区分“版权保护”与“接触控制”两种措施,以及实践中行政执法权的越位、缺位导致的。应通过区分“版权保护、接触控制”两种措施以及“获取、使用”两种侵权行为、增加技术保护措施使用的限制条件、转变行政执法机构的职能等积极路径保护公众信息自由。There is a long-standing conflict between intellectual property rights and public freedom of information.The continuous development of the“anti-circumvention clause”has caused the conflict to intensify.As a basic human right,freedom of information is being gradually eroded by the expansion of intellectual property rights.The existing research mainly carries on the right balance from the negative protection path,but the positive protection path is more advantageous to realizing the public freedom of information and alleviates the conflict between the two rights.In practice,there are some problems in the application of the anti-circumvention clause,such as the legality of the aim,the division of the protected part,and the determination of the circumvention.This is mainly due to the lack of restrictions on the users of technical measures,the failure to distinguish between“copyright protection”and“contact control”,and the offside and absence of administrative bodies in practice.We should protect public freedom of information by distinguishing the two measures of copyright protection and contact control and the two torts of access and use,increasing the restrictive conditions for the use of technology protection measures,and changing the functions of administrative supervision agencies.

关 键 词：反规避条款 知识产权 公众信息自由 利益平衡 人权 

分 类 号：D923.41[政治法律—民商法学] D922.294[政治法律—法学]