网络游戏直播中的著作权问题探究

网络游戏直播作为新兴产业,其涉及到的著作权问题在目前的司法实践和理论研究中都存在模糊不清的问题。网络游戏直播行为涉及到网络游戏著作权人、游戏玩家、主播和网络游戏平台等不同主体的专有权利。在我国现行著作权法框架下,这种专有权利并不落入广播权和信息网络传播权的控制范围,只能寻求兜底条款的保护。网络游戏直播行为是否构成合理使用,需要根据不同的游戏类型具体个案判断,玩家个人直播符合三步检验法,构成合理使用,而大型竞技类游戏的直播无法通过第一步检验,部分非竞技类游戏无法通过第三步检验,均不构成合理使用。     

大庆市网络游戏直播现状调查研究

近几年,网络游戏产业高速发展,网络游戏直播行业也持续升温,社会参与人数众多,因此有关网络游戏行业的法律纠纷也日益增多,网络游戏直播侵权的发案率居高不下,其中以关于此行业的著作权问题纠纷在司法实践中最难处理,司法实践中又以网络游戏直播中所形成的画面是否为著作权保护的客体争论最大。网络游戏直播中包括主播打游戏所形成的画面,以及在直播过程中直播者对游戏进行的解说行为。文章认为由于我们国家的著作权法以及相关的法律规定并没有对以上网络游戏直播中形成的画面或者存在的行为进行明确的法律定性,所以现阶段学界与司法实践主要对网络游戏直播中所形成的作品属性定性存在分歧,导致司法实践困难重重。     

电子游戏直播中知识产权保护研究

电子游戏与视听作品相类似,可以单独作为一类作品加以保护,在我国目前的法律框架下,只能将其归入到电影作品和类电影作品当中.游戏玩家的法律地位取决于游戏设计的类型.当游戏给玩家设置了足够的创作空间时,玩家可能是演绎人.反之,当游戏没有为游戏玩家设置足够的创作空间,玩家可能是表演者.在电子游戏直播中,可以将游戏直播分为两种模式,每种模式下的侵权认定各不相同.     

网络游戏直播中的著作权侵权问题研究

近几年,随着网络的发展,电子游戏与网络直播的联系越来越紧密,同时也引发了一系列的法律问题。网络游戏直播权利不明不仅不利于权利维护,而且不利于网络环境的维护。[1]文章将从号称"网络游戏直播侵权首案"的"上海耀宇诉广州斗鱼案"入手,对网络游戏直播的表现形式、游戏画面是否构成著作权中的"作品",网络游戏直播方的著作权等问题进行剖析,以期通过对热点问题法律适用的探讨来推进立法、司法的完善。     

论电子游戏著作权客体类型——基于电子游戏“二元差异性”的实证分析

电子游戏应以何种著作权客体予以保护，学界和实务界仍存争议。设立法律客体的目的在于使法律对特征相同或相似的法律现象具有统一的调整路径，而电子游戏因本质类型差异和客体交叉，被统一地纳入单一权利客体保护不仅存在逻辑和适用上的障碍，还可能使玩家本应享有的著作权被“一刀切”式地剥夺。“单一客体说”在电子游戏类型差异和玩家行为独创性差异的“二元差异性”视角下似有讨论空间。同时，为了使电子游戏著作权保护能更好兼顾当下游戏画面直播、二创视频等典型纠纷，可以考虑充分发挥用户协议的作用。     

电子游戏直播画面的作品性质再研究

电子游戏直播行业是近年来最热门的文化产业之一,对于电子游戏直播画面本身的可版权性已经不存在争议,但是关于其是否构成新作品的判断标准问题却存在着讨论空间。在分析电子游戏直播画面的作品性质时,应当将其分为游戏赛事直播和个人游戏直播两种不同的模式进行讨论。在游戏赛事直播模式方面,只有赛事直播画面才能构成新的作品;在个人游戏直播模式方面,当玩家存在具体创作行为或是游戏存在个性表达空间时,该画面便构成新的作品。由于新作品是在原有的游戏运行画面上添附了具有独创性的表达,因此可以作为改编作品予以保护。     

论共有表演者权

两个以上的民事权利主体就同一表演活动共同享有的表演者权称为共有表演者权。共有表演者权既可以通过共同的表演活动原始产生,也可以通过转让和继承的方式继受取得。共有表演者权的权利主体包括自然人和法人组织,权利对象为静态的表演形象和动态的表演活动,权利内容则具有人身权和财产权的二元属性。共有表演者权的权利归属以及许可、转让等行使规则比较复杂,但我国现行《著作权法》几乎没有规定,应完善相关立法,以约定优先、鼓励传播的原则确立其行使规则。     

网络游戏在线直播的著作权合理使用研究

网络游戏直播是我国当前发展最为迅猛的文化产业新业态，但未经许可直播网络游戏属于侵权行为还是合理使用在理论和实务中均有争议。游戏动态画面是吸引网络用户在线观看直播的主要原因，游戏直播市场属于游戏画面权利人的预期市场。在认定网络游戏直播是否构成合理使用时，不宜直接将美国版权法上的四要素标准和国际公约中的三步检测法作为我国司法实践中审理具体案件的适用依据。基于解释论立场，网络游戏直播不属于合理使用，这一结论也可依据四要素标准从学理上得以检验。     

我国网络游戏画面版权问题研究

对网络游戏画面的版权定性,是解决网络游戏盗版、网络游戏直播等网络游戏版权纠纷的前提。首先梳理网络游戏、网络游戏画面的概念,界定网络游戏画面的内涵与特征,从作品的构成要件出发,论述了网络游戏画面的可版权性。进而在确定网络游戏画面应受著作权法保护的前提下,检视我国目前著作权法对网络游戏画面保护的缺漏,发现并阐析了已有的类电影作品、戏剧作品和《著作权法(送审稿)》中的"视听作品"这三者均与网络游戏画面具有不可兼容性,难以将其纳入相应的保护范围,有必要对相关规定进行完善。最后通过研究各国保护网络游戏画面的模式,揭示其对我国的借鉴意义,继而提出相应建议:完善《著作权法(送审稿)》中"视听作品"的含义和范围,将视听作品的定义重点放在"连续动态画面"和"视听觉(视觉)感知"这两方面;采取"视听作品"的全新概念,而不是扩大解释"电影作品和类电影作品"。     

表演者权初探

表演者权初探乔玉君一、表演者权概述表演者权是指表演者依法对其表演所享有的专有权利。它是邻接权的一项重要内容，是最早产生的邻接权。在各国的著作权法中，均规定了表演者的权利并给予了法律保护。我国著作权法中也含有此项内容．表演作为最早的使用作品的形式，是与...     

Computer game licences: The EULA and its discontents

This article considers the legal efficacy of terms found in the end-user licences (EULAs) of Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs). The article focuses on selected terms in the EULAs of well-known MMORPGs, Everquest and Runescape as well as a more recent MMORPG, Path of Exile. Although there are many examples of inappropriate and unenforceable terms in EULAs, computer games provide a particularly salient example. Eager for access to a game, players accept the EULA without question and, unaware of their rights or keen to avoid costly litigation, rarely challenge the terms. Given the value of the games industry to the international economy, the article recommends that international guidance for EULA content is needed.     

网络游戏经济性规制析论

网络游戏自产生以来,它在给玩家带来休闲娱乐的同时,也产生了一些消极影响。如何促进网络游戏的健康发展,除采用法律规制、行政规制、社会性规制方式之外,本文认为,网络游戏主要是一种市场现象,应当以经济性规制工具为主要手段,利用价格杠杆调节网络游戏市场的供需平衡,积极培育和引导理性的消费观念,发挥网络游戏行业自律组织的沟通和协调作用,加大对违规违法行为的查处力度,鼓励和扶持优秀作品,也是推动网络游戏健康发展的重要保障。     

环境权主体研究

环境权自提出以来发展至今,在理论和实践上都面临着困境。本文试图从法理学的角度对环境权的主体进行分析,来突破这一困境。因为有了主体,权利才有了归属。只有环境权的主体明确,分析环境权的客体、内容才有意义。环境权主体属于权利主体的范畴,又有其自身的特征。环境权的主体包括:自然人和人类,而不包括单位、国家和自然体。     

Is it really just a game? Copyright and online role-playing games

Legal context. Massively multiplayer online role-playing games(MMORPGs) are a craze that has swept the globe. Online gamershave been reported to spend 22 hours per week online playingtheir favourite games while there have been reports of playersspending up to 55 hours at a time playing. Not all gamers arehobby gamers, nor are they just teenagers having fun. A markethas grown around MMORPGs and a lucrative online market has emergedoutside the games for the sale of game characters and items.The value of this market has been estimated at US$880 million.At the heart of disputes concerning the sale of game charactersand items is the question of copyright ownership. Game providersclaim that the End User Licence Agreements (EULAs) give themintellectual property ownership and rights over any dealingswith the game characters and items. Many gamers on the otherhand are abhorrent at the assertion that they have no claimto characters and items that they have spent many hours developing. Key points. The first issue that needs to be considered is whethercopyright subsists at all in the game characters and items.The next question to be considered is who owns the copyrightin in-game characters and items. To answer the question, onemust look to the EULAs, but the EULAs do not provide all theanswers because issues such as moral rights cannot be governedby EULAs. Further, the practice of farming by companies runningdigital sweatshops complicates the relationship between gamersand game providers. Practical significance. There have been numerous disputes concerningthe game characters and items between game developers, gamers,and farming companies. This article examines the key copyrightissues at stake.     

Patently designed and trade marked: MMORPGs

Legal context: A market has grown around massively multiplayer online role-playinggames (MMORPGs) and a lucrative online market has emerged outsidethe games for the sale of game characters and items. Much discussionand debate have focused on the copyright issues and the roleof End User Licence Agreements (EULAs), and strong criticismshave been levelled at those EULAs that give game providers IPownership and rights over any dealings with the game charactersand items. MMORPGs also raise legal issues in other IP law areasof trade marks, designs, and patents, and this article willdeal with these. Key points: Trade marks can be a powerful tool to protect the creativityof online characters and items but the first issue that needsto be considered is whether these creations in the online worldcan be trade marked. Similar considerations exist for patentsand designs. Further, there are also issues with trade marks,patents, and designs properly registered in the real world beingused in MMORPGs by those who are not the owners. The ownersof these registered IP rights would obviously wish to protecttheir interests to the fullest. Practical significance: There have been a number of issues and debates raised concerningthe game characters and items between game developers, gamersand farming companies. This article examines the key trade mark,patent and design law issues at stake.     

Perverse Effects of Unfulfilled Norms: A Look at the Roots of Favoritism

In four experiments, 120 subjects had to judge and reward the performance of players in a game. When no player fulfilled the norm of the game, subjects gave rewards arbitrarily or favored their friends among the players; when some players fulfilled the norm of the game, subjects made fair judgments, rewarding the players who fulfilled the norm, and they did not favor their friends. These findings suggest that research on in-group favoritism should include a serious discussion of the formal norms that regulate people's decisions when they have to allocate rewards.     

Copyright and live streaming of sports broadcasting

The inception of live streaming technology has rapidly changed the way in which sporting events are transmitted. The unauthorised retransmission of live sports telecasts over the Internet has become one of the main concerns in sports media, where broadcasters have lost billions of dollars’ worth of sports broadcasting contracts and sponsorship deals. The scale of this problem has caused serious harm, both to sports rights-holders and to broadcasters. Legislative reforms are required in order to balance the public’s ever-increasing desire for convenient ways to view digital materials against the legal rights of the owners of the material, while also aiming to maintain a forward-looking perspective in an attempt to foresee potential technological advancements that may pose considerable challenges to the traditional copyright law. This article analyses how the concept of live streaming of live sports has changed the legal landscape.     

Basketball in the Key of Law: The Significance of Disputing in Pick‐Up Basketball

While the conception of law as a constructive and constitutive force is often stated, we have relatively few concrete and grounded case studies showing precisely where and how social actors construct the meaning of their engagements through the invocation of legality. Drawing on Erving Goffman's Frame Analysis (1974), I use the concept of “keying” to articulate how basketball players in informal “pick‐up” games transform the meaning of their activity through disputing. By playing in a legalistic way, players constitute the game as “real” and “serious” rather than “mere play.” The analysis tracks basketball players in the heat of action as they perceive the game, call rule violations, contest those violations, and ultimately give up. Players organize each phase of the dispute's natural history in the “key of law” by constructing and comparing cases, invoking and interpreting rules, setting precedent, arguing over procedure, and proposing solutions. Through these practices, players infuse the game with rich meaning and generate the motivational context demanding that the game be treated as significant. This analysis contributes to an understanding of legal ontology that envisions law's essence as potentiating rather than repairing normative social life.     

新兴权利论纲

当代中国社会主义法治建设的历史画卷不断展开的过程在法律层面的一个显著体现就是各种新兴权利不断展现的过程。新兴权利之新既可以从以时间和空间为核心的形式标准来判定,又可以从权利的主体、客体、内容和情景为核心的实质标准来判定。新兴权利的产生在根本上乃是因应社会的发展而在法律制度需求上的自然反应,而新兴权利与旧有权利之间的冲突和协调不仅始终贯穿于法律权利实践的始终,而且彰显着权利发展的真实样态。     

Fair use of works of art in children's games

The aim of this article is to examine the legal possibilities available to creators of children's games, enhancing art education. It focuses on the type of games that enrich the learning experience by means of works of visual, verbal or musical art. I do not deal with the technology of the digital age, but examine the educational art game as a ‘derived game’, containing the original work of art (as a component of the game), and discuss in depth the issue of the use of works of art, integrated in children's games. The situation in this sphere is murky. In the toy shops there are no games providing enrichment in the understanding of art, and shops in art galleries have only a few games with reproductions of pictures in those galleries. The subject is particularly important in view of the fact that children are not exposed to works of art contributing to their cognitive development and critical perspective, and when they do see works of art, they are usually behind some barrier and not easily accessible. The complex situation created by strict copyright laws deters the planners and producers of games and makes such games expensive. As a result, we as a society, fail to exploit a powerful experiential means to enrich the cultural world of the younger generation. This article examines the possibilities of establishing a right of fair use of reproductions of works of art in children's games.