论视听作品的权利主体及其利益平衡

发布时间：2018-06-26 00:47

本文选题：视听作品 + 权利归属　；参考：《宁波大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：视听作品既是作品,又是视听产品。作为视听作品,各作者和表演者作为艺术创造者,自然应当对作品享有相应权利;而作为市场经济中的视听产品,其制片者也应当对最终的产品享有相应权利。所以,如何在分配视听作品利益时实现制片者和作者、表演者之间的利益平衡是本文关注和解决的核心问题。文章第一部分分析了视听作品的著作权归属。首先,从修改草案对视听作品的权属规定入手,指出修改草案导致视听作品的著作权人及其作者的归属更加混乱。其次,分析了视听作品的属性,认为视听作品从外部关系上看是演绎作品,从内部关系上看是合作作品。最后,主张视听作品合作作者范围确定应采取“半封闭式”模式,并以此认定视听作品的著作权应原始归属于其合作作者。文章第二部分分析了视听作品中表演者权的归属。首先,从修改草案权属规定的立法混乱入手,认为表演者权的主体确定应该是对表演者权的主体进行限定,而不是对表演者的概念进行限定。其次,从视听表演者权的发展沿革,特别是《北京条约》的相关规定来看,认为视听作品中的视听表演者权应原始归属于表演者。文章第三部分对二次获酬权的可行性进行了分析。首先,阐述了二次获酬权的基本问题,指出草案的相关规定及其简要说明和现有理论研究都尚未界定二次获酬权的概念和明晰其内涵。其次,对二次获酬权的可行性进行了判断,认为即使明确了内涵,其在实际操作中也不具有可行性。最后,结合域外法的考察,明晰了相关国际条约和国外立法也没有规定作者和表演者享有所谓二次获酬权,只是国内学者误以为可资借鉴的良方。文章第四部分阐述了应在合同视野下实现视听作品的利益平衡。首先,对权利归属的两类立法模式作了详细分析,认为国内立法应采取推定转让模式。其次,为保障作者和表演者在推定转让模式下的合同权益,主张法律应对合同的意思自治进行适当干预,可借鉴德国著作权法规定的“共同报酬规则”和显失公平时的“变更报酬请求权”。
[Abstract]:Audiovisual works are not only works, but also audiovisual products. As audio-visual works, writers and performers, as artistic creators, should naturally enjoy the corresponding rights to the works, and as audio-visual products in the market economy, their producers should also enjoy the corresponding rights to the final products. Therefore, how to balance the interests of producers, authors and performers in the distribution of the interests of audiovisual works is the core problem that this paper focuses on and solves. The first part of the article analyzes the copyright ownership of audiovisual works. First of all, the author points out that the revised draft leads to the confusion of the ownership of the copyright owner and the author of the audio-visual work. Secondly, the author analyzes the attributes of audio-visual works and thinks that audio-visual works are deductive works from the external relationship and cooperative works from the internal relationship. Finally, it is proposed that the scope of co-authors of audio-visual works should be determined by "semi-closed" mode, and that the copyright of audio-visual works should belong to the co-authors. The second part of the article analyzes the ownership of performers' rights in audio-visual works. First of all, starting from the legislative confusion of amending the right of ownership in the draft, the author thinks that the subject of performer's right should be defined by the subject of performer's right, not the concept of performer's right. Secondly, from the development and evolution of audiovisual performers' rights, especially the relevant provisions of the Beijing Treaty, the author thinks that the audio-visual performers' rights in audio-visual works should belong to the performers. The third part of the article analyzes the feasibility of the right to second pay. First of all, the basic problems of the right to second pay are expounded, and it is pointed out that the relevant provisions of the draft and its brief explanation and existing theoretical studies have not defined the concept of the right to second pay and clarified its connotation. Secondly, the feasibility of the right to second pay is judged, even if the connotation is clear, it is not feasible in practice. Finally, combined with the investigation of the extraterritorial law, it is clear that the relevant international treaties and foreign legislation also do not stipulate that the authors and performers enjoy the so-called right to second pay, which is only a good way for domestic scholars to think that they can be used for reference. The fourth part of the article expounds that the interests of audio-visual works should be balanced in the field of contract. Firstly, the author makes a detailed analysis of the two kinds of legislative models of the attribution of rights, and thinks that the domestic legislation should adopt the mode of presumption transfer. Secondly, in order to protect the contractual rights and interests of the author and performer under the mode of constructive transfer, it is advocated that the law should intervene appropriately in the autonomy of the meaning of the contract. We can draw lessons from the rules of common remuneration stipulated by German copyright law and the right of claim for change of remuneration when it is manifestly unfair.
【学位授予单位】：宁波大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.41

【相似文献】