戏仿的法律保护和限制——从《一个馒头引发的血案》切入

通过分析《一个馒头引发的血案》以及类似作品,本文指出它代表了一类我国著作权法中没有明确予以规定的戏仿作品;并主张,由于戏仿的娱乐和批评价值,我国著作权法应当基于“合理使用”原则对戏仿予以保护;基于中国的国情,戏仿有可能涉及侵犯个人的人格(名誉)和市场价值(声誉),应当根据情况分别予以适度保护;由于电影产品消费的特殊性,保护戏仿还具有保护消费者权益以及促进当代中国的文化、社会建设的意义。     

Is it a fair deal to tell tales on the tabloids?

Legal context. A recent High Court judgment, Fraser-WoodwardLimited v BBC and Brighter Pictures Limited, is of key interestto those that use or advise upon the use of copyright materialfor the purposes of criticism or review. Key points. This case involved the use of newspaper photographsof David and Victoria Beckham in a television documentary aboutthe relationship between celebrities and the press. The programmeillustrated its theme using screenshots of tabloid newspaperpages, which inevitably included a number of photographs. Theclaimant was the copyright holder in respect of a number ofthe photographs, and alleged that their reproduction in theTV programme was an infringement of copyright. The defendantssuccessfully relied upon the fair dealing and incidental inclusiondefences to copyright infringement. Practical significance. Although each fair dealing case willultimately turn on its own facts, Mann J gave a very usefulreview of the state of copyright law in this difficult area.     

实用艺术品著作权的保护

实用艺术品应当列入著作权保护对象的美术作品类。实用艺术作品作为著作权的保护对象,兼具艺术性和实用性,但艺术性必须同实用性相分离独立存在。独立完成和个性体现是判断独创性的一般标准,实用艺术品独创性的标准应适度低于纯美术作品的独创性标准,且有利于以著作权法鼓励产品创新和市场公平竞争。作品创作差异的必然性与作品表达近似的可能性存在辩证统一关系。接触之合理可能性、实质性相似以及独立创作抗辩是判断侵权是否成立的重要因素。     

Legal reflections on the Google Print Library Project

Legal context. IP lawyers need a better understanding of theimplications of new technology when advising their clients onlegal strategies for appropriating rents from the exploitationof intellectual property rights in the digital environment.Conversely, clients seeking to ascertain the permissible limitsfor accessing material on the Internet must be made aware ofthe critical distinction between contractual and copyright issues. Key points. Licensing of copyright will continue to be an efficientinstrument for resolving issues relating to compensation andboundaries for permissible use. A sound understanding of thedigital environment will ensure that potential problems associatedwith the scope of the restricted acts under the Copyright, Designsand Patents Act 1988 can be avoided. Lawyers should also beaware of the possible policy developments relating to the exploitationof digital content following the deliberations in the GowersReview. Lawyers should also re-examine the submissions in boththe Grokster and Perfect 10 cases, recognizing the circumstanceswhen copyright arguments raised in other jurisdictions may beimported into the United Kingdom. Practical significance. The absence of any UK legal precedentwith regard to the copyright issues arising from the disputebetween search engine providers and copyright owners providesno excuse for failing to consider how contractual instrumentsmay efficiently resolve issues relating to the appropriationof rents from intellectual property rights. The absence of a‘fair dealing’ exception does not inevitably meanthat, should a similar dispute as that in Google v The Author'sGuild arise in the United Kingdom, a copyright infringementwill have taken place.     

论实用艺术作品的著作权保护

实用艺术作品兼具实用性、艺术性、独创性和可复制性并且符合作品的构成要件,然而我国现行著作权法却不能对实用艺术作品提供充分有效的知识产权保护,其中的相关规定反而造成本国实用艺术作品与伯尔尼公约成员国作品“双重待遇”的尴尬局面。本文认为,我国著作权立法应当对美术作品进行狭义界定,将实用艺术作品与之并列纳入著作权法的保护范围,并对其提供著作权加专利权的双重保护模式。     

论著作权合理使用制度的适用范围

由于合理使用处在权利与限制的交界处,其适用范围的任何变化,都可能重塑著作权法。面对新技术的冲击,在确定合理使用的适用范围时,不能因技术的便利而干涉著作权市场对信息资源的配置,而应恪守合理使用最初的立法理由,将其定位为对市场失灵的弥补,在利用行为有助于公共利益的基础上,考察其是否符合交易不能或正外部性市场失灵,同时把对作品潜在市场的影响视为最关键的判断标准。这不但维护了著作权的私权属性,更是界定合理使用适用范围的最佳路径。     

版权法上的公共领域研究

Public domain is a core rule of copyright law, under which various creative materials are available for an author to use without charge or liability for infringement, hence ensuring the effective implementation of copyright law. Public domain is characterized by openness, public ownership, irrevocability and formality. Based on the premise that the author’s work will not be interfered, public domain ultimately aims at the enlargement of its own universe and prosperity of the culture of human society. Its introduction into copyright law satisfies both historical and logical demands. Without its acknowledgement, copyright cannot be justified. In that sense, public domain and copyright can be deemed as twins. Public domain is not only an existing institution, but also an ideological tendency or a methodology. It has evaluative and inspective values towards copyright. It is an important precondition of copy-rights, and what is more, an important measure for controlling the expansion and realizing the purpose of copyright. Huang Hui, Ph.D, is a lecturer of civil law at Southwest University of Political Science and Law. Till now, he has released over 20 research articles in academic journals in China, such as Modern Law Science, Legal Forum, Academic Forum, etc. His magnum opus includes: Legal Philosophy Exposition of Unreasonable Outstretch in Intellectual Property Rights, Interpretation & Transfer: An exposition of de-intelligence of intellectual property rights, research on the protection of works in public domain, etc.     

Whose trade mark rights? What the Microsoft case means for trade mark owners

Legal context. The article considers the influence of the commissionruling in the Microsoft case, forcing Microsoft to use its WINDOWS-trademark for an ‘unbundled’ version of the program inthe light of the trade mark owner's properties rights. The scopeof these rights is determined by the function of the trade markand the rights that the trade mark laws confer to the ownerin case of infringement. Key points. Trade marks are protected as property rights undercommunity law. They are the embodiment of past investments andtransform the reputation of the owner into a bankable asset.Consumers rely on trade mark owners' control over quality. Thisis mirrored by the rights of the trade mark owner to stop interferencewith quality and image, in particular in the context of resaleof altered products. Any interference that would be considereda trade mark infringement if committed by a private party shouldbe considered an interference with the protected property rightif caused by a government agency. This interference is not justifiedby the public interest because trade mark rights also embodyimportant public interests. Practical significance. If the analysis proposed in the articleis followed, intellectual property rights have to be given greaterweight in shaping antitrust remedies.     

交易成本和价格歧视理论在著作权合理使用中的定位与适用

经济学交易成本理论和价格歧视理论是数字时代强化著作权保护,限制合理使用的主要理论依据.由于某些合理使用是为克服交易成本过高的市场失灵而设,交易成本理论和价格歧视理论对合理使用范围的缩小具有一定的解释力.但是,它们不是确定合理使用范围的唯一标准.除交易成本外,外部性的内部化和公共利益也是影响合理使用适用的重要因素.当存在正外部性无法有效内部化的市场失灵,或者基于维护公共利益,也应考虑适用合理使用规则,以确保作品正外部性的充分释放.     

Digital technology: its impact on copyright law and practice in North America

Legal context. The effect of rapid technological change on copyrightlaw in Canada and the United States, and in particular on thebalance between creators' rights and users' rights. Key points. Copyright law involves a balance between the rightsof both creators and users. When initially faced with fast-evolvingdigital technology, the courts struggled with the balancingact and tipped it in favour of users' rights. The Supreme Courtof Canada elevated various exceptions to infringement to userrights, and cautioned against a low standard of originalitywhich would favour creators' rights. The US Court of Appealsremarked that introduction of new technology is disruptive tocopyright owners whose works are sold through traditional mechanisms;and others suggested that a bias in favour of owners rightsmay have well impeded the development of digital culture. Despitethe initial struggles, legislative changes, market forces andrecent deference by the courts to the balancing of various interests,have slowly restored the copyright balance, even when facedwith rapid technological change. Practical significance. Copyright litigants must give carefulconsideration to the balance between creators' and users' rights,and be prepared to justify traditional copyright protectionin fields of new technology.     

中美实用艺术品著作权保护比较研究——兼论我国实用艺术品著作权保护的路径

实用艺术品的著作权保护问题实质上是如何确立著作权保护范围及标准的问题。我国现行《著作权法》并未将实用艺术品作为受保护客体,但也并未将其排除在著作权保护范围之外。而美国在实用艺术品的著作权保护上于立法层面是非常清晰的,在《1976年版权法》中已明确将其列为受保护客体,美国法院的诸多判例也影响了实用艺术品著作权保护研究的方向。本文梳理了中美两国实用艺术品的著作权保护问题的历史沿革及现状,总结归纳了两国具有代表性的判例,以求通过对比提炼出两国著作权法及司法实践中存在的问题。美国的相关立法及其司法裁判经验对于我国实用艺术品的著作权保护具备重要借鉴价值。     

Introducing the Open Clause to improve copyright flexibility in cyberspace? Analysis and commentary on the proposed “two-step test” in the Third Amendment to the Copyright Law of the PRC,in comparison with the EU and the US

The so called “three-step test”, that the limitations and exceptions of copyright shall be allowed in certain special cases, provided that they do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author, grants copyright flexibilities to balance the interests of all stakeholders, especially within the European system of circumscribed limitations and exceptions. This is essential for the domain of computer law, confronted by rapid and unpredictable global technological developments, and is, thus, enshrined in the most important international intellectual property (IP) treaties. Through the proposed third amendment to the Copyright Law of the PRC, the legislature intends to adopt this test while also introducing an open-ended list of limitations and exceptions that constitutes a China-specific “two-step test.” This contravenes prima facie the thesis endorsed by the WTO Panel in the case concerning Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act in 2000. In contrast, court decisions in China frequently apply the fair use doctrine of US copyright law, neglecting to consider its peculiar context of the US common law tradition and, thus, unduly expanding the Chinese courts' discretionary power.This paper summarizes the case law in China and takes a comparative approach to address the divergence between the judicial application of cyber copyright law and the existing legislation. It suggests revising the proposed Article 43 of the Copyright Law of the PRC to capture the due interpretation of the three-step test, thereby finessing the delineation between rights protection and free use with the compensation of remuneration under the principle of proportionality. It argues that transplanting the US fair use doctrine into Chinese copyright law is feasible, but with the preconditions of endeavouring to strengthen judicial reform to integrate the IP adjudication systems, enhancing the coherence and efficiency of copyright enforcement, and facilitating consistent dialogues between scholars, practitioners, and lawmakers.     

商标法上公有领域的保护

随着知识产权保护力度日渐增强,知识产权专有性与公有领域之间的矛盾愈加显现.近年来知识产权公有领域的保护被学界所关注,国内学者的研究多见于著作权法上公有领域的保护,专利法、商标法上公有领域保护的研究甚少.现实中常见一些把原本属于公共资源的文字、图形等作为商标注册后进行不当使用,并试图阻止他人“非商标意义上的使用”.如此一来,公有领域逐渐被蚕食“瓜分”而纳入专有领域,极大地影响公众的表达自由与言论自由.因此,商标法中的公有领域亟待获得维护.通过对商标法上公有领域保护问题的探讨,以警示对公共资源的维护,并提出完善我国商标权限制制度的建议.     

Regulation and brand value

Legal context. IP rights are dependent on the public policyconsiderations which provide the justification for their granting.However, when regulation impacts on the exercise of IP rights,there is often a clash of public policy considerations. Key points. This article considers what happens when that clashoccurs, concluding that, in all cases, IP rights will be trumpedby the public policy considerations which underlie the regulation,often with no basis for claiming compensation notwithstandingthe obvious and very real economic impact on the rights owner.Unfortunately, the markets do not always take this risk intoaccount when valuing premium brand companies. Practical significance. This conclusion may have serious implicationsfor premium brand companies, especially in heavily regulatedfields like alcohol, food, pharmaceuticals, and tobacco.     

Understanding IP enforcement in the United States and beyond

An often neglected topic in the field of IP law is IP borderenforcement. To a large extent, the protection and enforcementof IP rights is the burden of right holders and most discussionsinvolving the protection of these rights centre on (or at leastbegin with) obtaining patent, copyright, and trade mark protection.Additionally, much attention is paid to bringing and defendinginfringement suits. As a result, the importance of border enforcementis usually not given the attention     

著作权扩张及其缘由透视

对著作权法的历史考察表明,它代表了被保护权利的持续扩张,以及相应的在作品中作为公共领域部分的持续减少。著作权扩张表现在受保护的客体不断增加、著作权保护范围不断扩大、使用方式不断增多、著作权保护期限不断延长等方面。从技术发展方面看,技术因素对著作权扩张具有极大的影响。著作权的扩张不仅可以从著作权制度本身的角度加以考察,也可以从政治、文化视野和经济学的层面上分析。著作权扩张还可以从利益平衡原理得到解释。著作权扩张与限制的辩证关系也说明,利益平衡是著作权法永恒的主题。     

著作权法中“合理使用”与公共利益研究

一般认为著作权法是私法,以保障著作权人的利益为归依.然而,随着网络时代著作权人专有权的不断扩张,作为限制著作权人权利的合理使用制度越来受到重视.一方面,合理使用制度保障了公众对作品的接近、增进了知识和学习、促进了民主文化;另一方面,公共利益又是判定某一使用作品的行为是否为合理使用的重要指标.从公共利益视角审视合理使用制度,分析两者之间的关系,具有重要的学术意义和实践价值.     

Walking the groundless threats minefield

Legal context. It is one of the peculiarities of UK law thatthreatening litigation of IP rights can, in some circumstances,give rise to an action for "groundless threats". This has thepotential to cause great disruption to the right-holder's case.There is even the potential for professional advisors to endup in the dock where they made the threat on their client'sbehalf, raising the possibility of a conflict of interest preventingthe advisers from continuing to act. Key points. To minimise the risk of these scenarios, intellectualproperty law advisors, be they patent or trade mark attorneysor solicitors, should be aware of the provisions that governgroundless threats actions for the various IP rights, particularlyin light of the recent changes brought in by the Patents Act2004 and the further changes expected to the groundless threatsprovisions relating to designs. These alterations increasinglycomplicate what has always been a nebulous area of the law.In addition, there is considerable tension between the "talkfirst, sue later" philosophy underlying the Civil ProcedureRules and the "sue first, talk later" approach traditionallyused to circumvent threats actions. Reckitt recently confirmedthat the groundless threats provisions, while running counterto the purpose of the CPR, cannot be ignored by the Courts.This article provides an overview of the current state of thegroundless threats provisions that apply to the various IP rights,and considers how IP owners and their advisors can best navigatethe groundless threats minefield. Practical significance. Groundless threats form a complex andchanging area of IP law in the UK, which advisers need to takeinto account in virtually every dispute. Amendments made toSection 70 of the Patents Act 1977 have not provided a threatspanacea to patent holders and it remains to be seen how thesection will be interpreted by the Courts. What is clear isthat the threats provisions contained in the IP legislationwill remain in force in one form or another for the foreseeablefuture and that they remain a trap for the unwary.     

《著作权法》第三次修改是国情巨变的要求

为了应对时代的挑战和国情的巨变,著作权法第三次修改工作已经拉开序幕。要进一步推进著作权制度的改革和发展,就必须将之放在我国甚至全球政治、经济、文化等社会大环境和我国著作权司法发展大背景中来考量,秉承积极、稳妥、科学和理性态度,正确处理好技术进步导致的经济关系变革、市场经济的要求和文化发展等重要问题之间的关系,努力实现权利保护、作品传播和正当使用之间的协调和平衡。如此,方能构建起完善的著作权法律体系,培育国民对知识产权的普遍信仰。     

对作品保护平等待遇原则的研究——欧盟法院第五法庭第C-360/00号初步裁定评析

欧盟成员国意大利著作权规定,对于作品的保护期限一直持续到作者死亡后的56年.但是,另一成员国德国规定对于作品的保护期限一直持续到作者死亡后的70年.意大利籍作者的作品在德国的保护期限究竟应当为多长时间?对此,欧盟法院作出了初步裁决:如果一个成员国对其他成员国作者的著作权保护的期限少于对本国作者的著作权保护期限,则是为《欧洲联盟条约》所禁止的.换言之,欧盟成员国国民的著作权应当受到同等的保护.