從美國專利法及著作權法之間接侵權責任論我國著作權法間接侵權責任之建構

Tunghai University Institutional Repository > 法律學院 > 法律學系所 > 碩博士論文 > Item 310901/31593

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://140.128.103.80:8080/handle/310901/31593

题名:	從美國專利法及著作權法之間接侵權責任論我國著作權法間接侵權責任之建構
其它题名:	A study on the Secondary Liability under U.S. Patent and Copyright Act— For the Construction of Secondary Liability System of Taiwan’s Copyright Law
作者:	覃思嘉 CIN,SIH-JIA
贡献者:	胡心蘭 HU, HSIN-LAN 法律學系
关键词:	間接侵權責任;輔助侵權責任;誘引侵權責任;代位侵權責任;著作權法 secondary liability;contributory liability;inducement liability;vicarious liability;copyright law
日期:	2019
上传时间:	2019-12-16T03:21:52Z (UTC)
摘要:	美國最高法院於1984年之Sony案移植美國專利法271條c項之通用商品原則於著作權法中，並於2005年之Grokster案引入美國專利法271條b項誘引侵權責任規範，成為著作權法間接侵權責任之新興類型。基於數位時代迅速發展與變革之科技技術，自2003年開始，美國司法實務對Sony原則之適用範圍產生不同解讀，本文依美國著作權法及專利法有歷史上同源關係為基準，透過分析涉及間接侵權責任之專利案件，作為Sony原則適用範圍之依據。又美國著作權法間接侵權之輔助侵權原則，由來已久，卻能因應數位時代科技技術之迅速變革，同時美國司法實務肯定Sony原則存續之必要，以此作為促進科技發展及給予創作人充足創作誘因之平衡，本文藉由分析美國著作權法涉及間接侵權責任案件，整理美國著作權法間接侵權責任成立之要件，作為我國著作權法間接侵權責任建構之參考。觀察我國立法者分別於2007年及2019年制定與美國著作權法間接侵權責任性質相近之著作權法第87條第1項第7款及第8款規定。前款規範係立法者依美國最高法院於Grokster案之裁判，引入類似美國著作權法之誘引侵權責任；後者則係為填補科技迅速發展所創造之法律漏洞。然而對照美國著作權法之間接侵權責任，該二款規定於適用上屬於針對性之立法規範，觀察我國司法實務之見解，本文認為我國著作權法有增訂一般性輔助侵權責任規範之需求，同時亦有引進Sony原則之必要，因此提出修法意見，以期日後作為立法者修法之參考。 The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1984 decision in the Sony case transplanted the “staple article of commerce” doctrine of section 271(c) of the Patent Act into the Copyright system. And the decision in 2005 Grokster case, Supreme Court imported inducement of infringement under the section 271(b) of Patent Act to the Copyright Law, formed a new kind of the secondary infringement in the Copyright system. Due to the rapid development and the transformation of the technology in the Digital Age, from 2003 beginning, the recognition of the judgments in the U.S. has been the spilt on the Sony Rule’s application. According to the “historic kinship” between the U.S. Patent Act and the Copyright Act, the study aimed to explore the application of Sony Rule by analyzing the Patent cases involving the secondary liability. In addition, the secondary liability under the doctrine of contributory infringement of the U.S. Copyright system can be traced back to 1911, however, it remains to meet the rapid transformation in the digital age so far. Also, the recognition of the judgments in the U.S. affirmed the necessity of the Sony Rule to make a balance between promoting the advance on science and useful arts and giving the creator sufficient incentive to create. Thus, the study reviewed the leading cases to examine the application of the secondary liability under the U.S. Copyright system, and took it as a base for the construction of secondary liability system of Taiwan’s Copyright Law.Finally, the legislature of Taiwan enacted subparagraphs 7, paragraph 1, Article 87 of the Copyright Act in 2007 which referred the Supreme Court of United States’ 2005 decision in the Grokster case, and enacted subparagraphs 7, paragraph 1, Article 87 of the Copyright Act in 2019 for plugging the legal loophole after the rapid transformation of the digital technology in the decade. In contrast with the secondary liability under the U.S. copyright system, both of the subparagraphs in the Copyright Act of Taiwan were targeted at the specific Industrial technology developer only. While observing the application of subparagraphs 7, paragraph 1, Article 87 of the Copyright Act by recognition of the judgments of Taiwan with the constant rapid technological change, there were necessities to enact the general article of the contributory infringement, and implant the Sony Rule in Taiwan’s Copyright Law. Therefore, the study attempted to make the suggestions through the cases involving the application of subparagraphs 7, paragraph 1, Article 87 of the Copyright Act with the Set-Top Box in Taiwan.
显示于类别:	[法律學系所] 碩博士論文

文件中的档案:

档案	大小	格式	浏览次数
107THU00194114-001.pdf	3293Kb	Adobe PDF	701	检视/开启

在THUIR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

数据加载中.....