知识产权特征新议

产权即财产权 ,既包括财产所有权又包括财产支配权或经营权。尽管所有权的范畴在不断扩展 ,但仍不会最终取代产权 ,倒是不断扩张的物权观念 ,日益接近产权。物权、债、知识产权皆从属于财产权。虽然知识产权的大部分来源于古代或近代的特权 ,但在当代 ,知识产权应是民事权利的一部分。     

DATA REGULATION IN THE INTERNET OF THINGS

The reflections on data regulation in the internet of things (IoT) in this paper provide an overview of the different conceptions and legal problems of “data property rights.” Beginning with an overview of the existing and possible applications of the future IoT (in particular, smart cars), this paper describes the legal concerns that may arise because of increased commercialization of object-generated data. The author uses German and European Union law to illustrate the legal complexities, solutions, and shortcomings. He demonstrates how and to what extent these issues are covered by traditional data protection regulations and highlights the conceptual blind spots of these regulations. He then contrasts the data protection paradigm (de lege lata) with the idea of a general erga omnes data property right (de lege ferenda) and describes the most common understanding of such a right, that is, a data producers’ property right. Against the background of the possible economic advantages of general data property rights, the paper discusses conceptual problems and constitutional concerns. In conclusion, the author rejects the idea of a general data property right.     

The Sinews of Peace: Rights to Solidarity in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Abstract. This article examines the provisions on social and economic rights contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. After a conceptual clarification of the terms “fundamental rights” and “rights to solidarity,” three main claims are made. First, not all rights to solidarity are granted the status of fundamental rights in the Charter, in contrast with the treatment of the right to private property. Second, positive law does not justify such an approach. An analysis of the sources of the Charter clearly indicates that the right to private property is not a proper fundamental right as Community law stands. Third, rights to solidarity could be construed as a repository of arguments that Member States and regions could invoke when claiming an exception to the four fundamental freedoms.     

知识产权的私权与人权属性——以《知识产权协议》与《世界人权公约》为对象

《知识产权协议》明确界定知识产权的本质属性 ,以私权的名义强调了知识财产私有的法律形式 ;《世界人权公约》赋予知识产权的人权意义 ,揭示了现代知识产权制度关于专有权利保护与知识财产利益分享的均衡思想。在私权与人权的统一范畴中把握与认知知识产权法 ,有助于我们考察这一法律制度的价值理念和社会功能。     

无形财产的理论和立法问题

文章认为 ,无形财产本质上是一种权利 ,它与有形财产从权利角度而言是相同的。无形财产的存在实际上是传统“物化思维”的产物 ,它能有效地界定利益、扩展财产范围并对传统财产权体系理论造成冲击。作者同时指出 ,从“权利”和“行为”角度去分析财产、统一财产权的理论是未来财产权理论发展的方向 ,其中对英美权利分析理论的借鉴是一个必不可少的环节。作者认为 ,无形财产的立法实际上涉及到整个财产权体系的立法问题 ,随着权利的多元化、客体的虚位和国家强力的作用进一步加强 ,财产权立法体系将出现专门化、分散化的趋势。     

Effects of Defects—Action or Argument? Thoughts about Deryck Beyleveld and Roger Brownsword’s Law as a Moral Judgment*

Abstract. Two claims lay the foundation for Beyleveld and Brownsword’s legal theory. The first says that immoral laws cannot be law, the second that rights to freedom and welfare can be proven to be logically necessary given merely the phenomenon of agency. The author argues that both claims are too strong. The first is an overidealization of law, which fails to do justice to its double nature as a real as well as an ideal phenomenon. The second must fail, for a moral “ought” cannot be deduced from a merely instrumental “ought.”     

Information Privacy Protection in the New Chinese Civil Code: Priority or Replacement?

The right to privacy has been developed through judicial practice and has evolved from “the protection of the right to reputation” to “privacy interest” then to “privacy right.” The Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China (2020) clarifies the right to information privacy and the right to personal information as two independent personality rights and establishes a privacy priority protection mechanism for private information in civil law. The comparative efficiency of the right to personal information may mean that the protection of the right to information privacy is weakened or even replaced by the right to personal information. The uncertainty and fragmentation of private information also creates a wide gray space for judicial decisions. The development from traditional privacy right to information privacy right and personal information right is generally positive and shows the active legal response to the protection of private information in multiple ways. However, clarifications and systematization are required to increase the effectiveness of such protections.     

试论知识产权限制的法理基础

利益平衡是构建知识产权限制制度的基本法律观。各类主体的相互利益关系,在知识产权法律中的权利配置方面,表现为本权与他权、私权与公益的关系;知识产权虽为一种独占性权利,但往往受到一定的限制,包括公共领域保留、权利行使限制、禁止权利滥用等;知识产权立法应秉持二元价值目标,即保护创造者合法权益和促进知识广泛传播。     

试论知识产权的私权属性及其公权化趋向

知识经济时代的知识产权正由传统意义上的私权蜕变为一种私权公权化的权利。私权性是知识产权的本质属性,知识产权私权的公权化趋向乃是建构知识产权法的利益平衡机制、保障知识产权人的专有权、实现知识产权法的公共利益价值之所需。知识产权私权的公权化表明知识产权兼具有私权属性和公权属性,二者对立又统一。其中,私权属性是矛盾的主要方面,公权属性是矛盾的次要方面。知识产权私权的公权化意味着在加强知识产权私权保护的同时应当重视社会公共利益,以防止私权保护不足或私权保护过度从而破坏知识产权人利益和社会公共利益的平衡。知识产权法在民法体系中具有相对独立地位。     

非法实施发明专利入罪的认识误区及克服

加强专利权保护是形势使然。专利权具有无形性、公开性和非竞争性,容易受到侵害。专利民事司法保护存在刚性不足、赔偿数额认定难等局限。专利行政执法对效率的追求造成程序监督弱化。刑法具有制裁手段的严厉性和“二次保障性”特征,遏制专利侵权优势明显。以专利权系私权、专利权具有不确定性、专利案件审理存在技术性难题为由反对非法实施发明专利侵权入罪的主张并不成立。专利刑事立法应当从“权利救济”转向“法益救济”,重构有关专利犯罪客体,增设非法实施发明专利罪,把故意侵犯发明专利且情节严重的行为规定为犯罪。     

论所有物返还请求权

所有物返还请求权是物上请求权中的一项重要内容,也是物权法制定中必须研究的课题。本文对所有物返还请求权的构成要件、行使、举证责任以及货币返还等问题进行了探讨,并对我国《物权法草案建议稿》相关条款进行了评价和建议。     

论法人人格权

团体人格是用作区分团体有无民法上独立财产主体地位的纯法律技术工具 ,既无社会政治性 ,亦无伦理性。人格权是一个历史性概念 ,其保护的是专属自然人人格所具有的那些伦理性要素 ,不能以同等含义适用于团体人格。法人的名称权、名誉权等权利无精神利益 ,实质上是一种财产权 ,且不具有专属性 ,非为任何团体人格存在之必须 ,故法人无人格权。     

Rule‐Intermediaries in Action: How State and Business Stakeholders Influence the Meaning of Consumer Rights in Regulatory Governance Arrangements

The boundaries between public and private actors are increasingly blurred via regulatory governance arrangements and the contracting out of rights enforcement to private organizations. Regulation and governance scholars have not gained enough empirical leverage on how state actors, private organizations, and civil society groups influence the meaning of legal rules in regulatory governance arrangements that they participate in. Drawing from participant observation at consumer law conferences and interviews with stakeholders, my empirical data suggest that consumer rights and, in fact, consumer law, mean different things to different stakeholders tasked with adjudicating consumer rights. Rights afforded consumers who purchase warranties are now largely contingent on first using alternative dispute resolution structures, some created and operated by private organizations with soft state oversight and others run by stakeholders but with greater state oversight and involvement. Using new institutional sociology and regulatory governance theories, I find that stakeholders involved in overseeing and administering these dispute resolution systems filter the meaning of consumer rights through competing business and consumer logics. Because consumer laws mean different things to stakeholders tasked with adjudicating consumer rights, two different rights regimes simultaneously exist in this field. I conclude that how rule‐intermediaries administering private and state‐run dispute resolution systems conceptualize what consumer laws mean in action may have implications for regulatory governance and more broadly, consumers' access to justice.     

占有在现代财产制度中的地位申明———一种基于动态冲突的考察

占有因其独占性、排他性以及在动产上所独具的权利外观效力,导致其负载权利与第三人利益的冲突,成为物权法调整客观公正与交易安全的关键制度.在对占有性质重新定位的前提下,通过对财产制度中占有关系的检索,可在交易各方主体的利益冲突关系中对占有概念进行理性的阐释.通过对此类占有关系的剖析,并通过对占有的性质——法益的进一步抽象,可以厘清占有中法益在财产制度中的具体法律价值.其体现为本权的冲突上属排他性冲突,保护方法上为非此即被:或保护权利或保护第三人利益.     

物权法草案的若干问题

由其第六次审议结果看,物权法草案在如下方面尚需进一步完善:不宜规定“根据宪法,制定本法”;不应废弃“物权法定原则”;不宜规定“野生动物资源属于国家所有”;不宜规定“国有化”措施;承包经营权的期限应统一规定为五十年;不可轻率规定“动产浮动抵押”;“公路、桥梁收费权”和“应收账款”融资,属于典型的“债权转让”,不宜规定在权利质权制度之中。     

Self‐Determination and Sovereignty over Natural Resources

This article makes the normative case for a differentiated approach to the sovereignty of states over natural resources. In the first half of the article, drawing on the example of the Yasuní‐ITT‐Initiative, I will argue that countries commit a moral wrong when they exploit natural resources for their own benefit (and to the detriment of the climate), but that they have the moral right to do so given the current structure of the international system. In the second half of the article, I address the question of whether states' rights over natural resources can be justified. Central to my argument will be the distinction between “control rights” and “income rights.” Only control rights, I will argue, can be justified as inherently tied to collective self‐determination.     

Judgments about the right to property from preschool to adulthood

Legal theorists argue that the constitutional right to property is defined, in part, by the property beliefs of the community, and how they change; yet little is known about these beliefs. In each of the three present studies, subjects aged 4 to 15 years, and adults, rated story characters who refused to return objects to their previous owners. Subjects under 10 did not clearly differentiate loss or destruction of one's own from another's property (study I), or the rights of persons who acquired possession by theft, loan, finding, or gift (study II). Creative labor was considered a more legitimate basis for possession by 15-year-olds than by 10-year-olds or adults (study III). These results support the idea that children understand “own” in the same way as adults understand “on loan”.     

关于我国物权法体系结构的思考

法律的体系结构问题是一个按一定逻辑联系将法律规范加以排列组合的问题。各国民法典 (包括其物权编 )体系结构上的差异 ,原于体系设计者选择的逻辑标准不同。法国法系国家在设计其民法典 (包括其物权编 )的体系结构时 ,更注重调整对象标准 ;而德国法系国家在设计其民法典 (包括其物权编 )的体系结构时 ,则更倾向于法权形式标准。本文作者主张以调整对象为标准来分配物权法与债法的内容 ,将作用于商品交换领域的抵押、质押、留置及让与担保等担保制度纳入债法规定 ,而不照搬德国法系国家的作法纳入物权法规定。对物权法内部的体系结构 ,本文作者主张除总则外 ,分所有权、用益物权、相邻权、占有与登记四个组成部分 ,以分别调整物的归属关系、物的用益关系、不动产相邻关系及无本权的动产占有人、不动产物权登记名义人与物之本权人之间的关系。本文作者认为 ,这一体系结构有利于明确物权法内各制度各自作用的社会经济生活领域 ,张扬它们各自不同的目的和功能 ,实现它们各自不同的价值。     

Raz on Rights: Human Rights,Fundamental Rights,and Balancing

After clarifying the outlines of Raz's interest theory of rights and its relationship to aspects of the principles theory of rights, I consider how his recent observations on human rights manage to fit (or fail to fit) into the interest theory. I then address two questions. First, I elaborate on Raz's definition of morally fundamental rights, arguing that he is right in claiming that there are no such rights. I then show that the interest theory accommodates the notion that rights may take qualitative precedence over conflicting considerations—a question that has become increasingly relevant in light of recent writing on rights.     

关于空间权的性质与立法体例的探讨

以立体方式利用土地 ,已成为世界范围的普遍趋势。由此 ,空间权制度得以在各国法律上相继建立。我国在制定物权法过程中 ,应借鉴各国的立法例 ,对空间权制度作出规定。本文认为 ,空间权并不是一项单独的用益物权 ,而是对一定空间上所设定的各种空间权利类型的抽象概括 ,其具体性质如何 ,依其设立目的的不同而定。为此 ,应将其置入与其设立目的相同的用益物权章节中一并规定