摘要
规避技术措施行为可以分为直接规避行为和间接规避行为。我国《著作权法》未加以区分地将规避技术措施行为全部规定为侵权行为,但并不意味着刑法上应当全部入罪化。现阶段直接规避行为缺乏刑事制裁必要性,但间接规避行为应单独认定为犯罪。规避技术措施行为的后续行为触犯刑法的,应以侵犯著作权罪论处。为实现法益的契合,应当增设新的罪名规制间接规避行为,同时应当将"以营利为目的"作为主观要件,实现犯罪圈的限缩。
The behavior of avoiding technical measures can be divided into direct evasion and indirect evasion. The copyright law of our country does not distinguish the act of circumvention of technical measures as tort without distinction, but it means that all the criminal law should be incriminating. At this stage, the indirect evasion should be identified as a crime alone, but the necessity of the direct evasion of the act is lack of criminal sanctions. The following acts of circumvention of technological measures behavior violated the criminal law, should be punished for the crime of copyright infringement. In order to achieve the coincidence of legal interests, new accusation should be added to regulate indirect evasion. Meanwhile, the subjective element of “profit as the purpose” should be used to achieve the narrowing of the crime circle.
作者
张弟
ZHANG Di(Law School, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang, Sichuan, China 621000)
出处
《昆明学院学报》
2019年第2期77-82,共6页
Journal of Kunming University
关键词
规避技术措施
直接规避
间接规避
刑法评价
avoidance of technological measure
direct evasion
indirect evasion
criminal law evaluation
