著作权法定的理论检视与内涵释义  

Theoretical Review and Connotation Interpretation of Copyright Legalization

作　　者：孙松 Sun Song

机构地区：[1]河南大学法学院(知识产权学院) [2]河南法治政府研究院

出　　处：《电子知识产权》2023年第10期44-52,共9页Electronics Intellectual Property

基　　金：2020年度河南省哲学社会科学规划项目“著作权授权许可模式研究”(项目号:2020CFX025)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：著作权法定的内涵认知,既关乎著作权立法规范的科学配置,也影响著作权法律规范的有效适用。一方面,作为所谓的“著作权法定”参照物的“物权法定原则”,并不排斥兜底条款的立法设置,以及法官造法的司法适用;另一方面,基于著作权在制度生成、权利结构、权利属性上的特殊性,更使其无法得出所谓“著作权法定”的结论。基于此,“著作权法定”应看作是法定权利来源之义,而不是权利类型、权利内容和权利限制的类型法定和体系封闭。其具体内涵应解读为不宜采取“权利法定”的“物权化思维”,不该排斥“兜底条款”的规范设置,不应限制一定范围内的法官造法。The connotation cognition of“copyrightlegalization”not only affects the scientific allocation of copyright legislation,but also affects the effective application of copyright law.On the one hand,as the reference object of the so-called“copyright legalization”,the principle of numerus clauses does not exclude the legislative setup of the miscellaneous provision and the judicial application of the judge-made law.On the other hand,due to the particularity of copyright in the system generation,right structure and right attribute,it is impossible to draw the conclusion of the so-called“copyright legalization”.Based on this,“copyright legalization”should be regarded as the meaning of the source of legal rights,rather than the type statutory and system closure of the type of right,the content of right and the limitation of right.Its specific connotation should be interpreted as that it should not adoptthe“property-based thinking”of“right legalization”,should not exclude the standard setting of“miscellaneous provision”,and should not restrict the judges to make laws within a certain range.

关 键 词：著作权法定 物权法定原则 兜底条款 法官造法 

分 类 号：D923.41[政治法律—民商法学]