摘要
录像制作者权不仅在适用上存在录像制品与视听作品的区分难题,在立法层面也有存废之争。录像制品相关规范的历史沿革表明,录像制作者权旨在周延保护连续画面,但其设置反映了我国立法者对邻接权制度的误读。邻接权的目的是保障特定主体的投入获得回报,并且不以对象独创性为设权的逻辑起点。录像制品对视听作品起补充保护而非分割界定的作用,更不能因其存在反而抬高视听作品的独创性标准,侵蚀视听作品及其著作权的适用空间。在著作权法采用视听作品概念后,建议废除录像制品条款,或至少将录像制品改为普通录像。
Not only is there a difficulty to distinguish video recordings from audiovisual works,but also a legislative dispute over producer's rights of video recordings.The evolution of the relevant norms indicates that producer's rights of video recordings is set up to achieve extended protection for continuous images,which also refiects the misunderstanding of neighboring rights by the Chinese legislators.The purpose of neighboring rights is to protect the rewarding interests of particular subject,and they do not take the originality of the object as its logical starting point for protection.Video recordings play a complementary role in protecting audiovisual works rather than dividing and defining the latter,and their existence should not raise the standard of originality requirement of audiovisual works,eroding the scope of audiovisual works and the applicable space of their copyright.Since the Chinese Copyright Law has adopted the concept of audiovisual works,this paper recommended that the provisions on video recordings be repealed,or at least the concept of video recordings be narrowed to plain videos.
出处
《知识产权》
CSSCI
北大核心
2023年第8期91-105,共15页
Intellectual Property
关键词
录像制品
录像制作者权
邻接权
视听作品
体系解释
video recordings
Producer's Rights of video recordings
neighboring rights
audiovisual works
Interface between criminal and civil law
作者简介
熊超成,中国人民大学法学院博士研究生
