论邻接权保护古籍点校成果的可行性和必要性——比较典型侵权纠纷案例之思考  

On the Feasibility and Necessity of the Protection of Ancient Book’s Proofreading Results by Neighboring Rights-Reflections on Typical Infringement Dispute Cases

作　　者：顾乐融 Lerong Gu(Law School,Yangzhou University,Yangzhou Jiangsu)

机构地区：[1]扬州大学法学院,江苏扬州

出　　处：《法学（汉斯）》2024年第7期4684-4690,共7页Open Journal of Legal Science

摘　　要：由于相关法律法规缺位,目前在司法实践中对于如何保护古籍点校成果有较大争议。现有的古籍点校成果侵权纠纷典型案例中法院主要提出的两大保护路径——以著作权保护和以普通民事权益保护,或在法理上不正确,或在执行上可行性低。与现有的两大保护路径比较,以邻接权保护古籍点校成果,不仅符合邻接权保护客体要求、符合邻接权制度初衷,具有法理上的可行性;而且既能建立起有效的激励机制,又能充分保障古籍出版产业公正的竞争秩序,具有权益平衡上的必要性。建议通过立法,增加《著作权法》中邻接权的种类,设置“古籍点校者权”,以疏通邻接权保护路径在立法上的障碍。Due to the lack of relevant laws and regulations,there is a great controversy in judicial practice on how to protect ancient book’s proofreading.In the existing typical cases of infringement disputes over the results of ancient book’s proofreading,the courts mainly put forward two main protection paths,namely copyright protection and ordinary civil rights and interests,which are either incorrect in legal theory or have low feasibility in enforcement.Compared with the existing two major protection paths,the protection of ancient book’s proofreading by neighboring rights not only meets the requirements of the object of protection of neighboring rights,but also conforms to the original intention of the neighboring rights system,and has legal feasibility.Moreover,it can not only establish an effective incentive mechanism,but also fully guarantee the fair competition order of the ancient book publishing industry,which is necessary to balance rights and interests.It is suggested that legislation should be passed to increase the types of neighboring rights in the Copyright Law,and to set up the“right of proofreaders of ancient books”to clear the legislative obstacles to the protection of neighboring rights.

关 键 词：邻接权 古籍点校 著作权 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]