摘要
著作权法在立法上细化传播权规定的本意是便于司法裁判,实践适用中却仍然出现了信息网络传播权与其他传播权的裁判分歧,产生分歧的原因可以归因于传播权彼此间悬而未决的边界。为界定传播权的边界,基于物权理论的事前界权范式将国际公约作为立法原意,边界先于个案界定且单纯决定私人间的权利义务关系。而基于侵权理论的事后界权范式则将国际公约作为立法历程,边界在个案中界定并衡量私人利益与公共利益。由于事后界权范式融入了公私利益的价值判断,避免了权利边界的绝对化,其更符合法教义学的基本立场,所以界权范式的转换有助于法院通过事后标准灵活调整权利边界,并将个案裁判有目的地作为实现公共利益的手段,从而尽可能地促成裁判共识。
The original intention of the Copyright Law in refining the provisions on communication rights was to facilitate judicial adjudication,but it has actually led to divergence in court decisions on the application of the right of making available and other communication rights.The divergence of judgments can be attributed to the unresolved boundaries of communication rights among themselves.In order to delineate the boundaries of communication rights,the ex ante paradigm based on property rights theory takes the international treaty as the legislative intent,and the boundaries delineated in prior individual cases simply determine the relationship of private rights and obligations.In contrast,the ex post paradigm based on tort theory takes the international convention as the legislative process,and the boundaries delineated in individual cases may balance private and public interests.Because the ex post paradigm incorporates the value judgment of public and private interests and avoids absolutizing the boundary of rights,it is more in line with the basic principle of legal dogmatics.Therefore,the paradigm transformation helps the courts to flexibly adjust the boundary of rights through ex-post standard,and purposefully take case-by-case adjudication as a means to realize the public interests,so as to promote the consensus of judgments.
作者
熊琦
雷征伟
XIONG Qi;LEI Zheng-wei(Law School,Huazhong University of Science and Technology,Wuhan Hubei 430070,China)
出处
《苏州大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
北大核心
2024年第2期98-111,共14页
Journal of Soochow University(Philosophy & Social Science Edition)
基金
国家社会科学基金重大项目“数字网络空间的知识产权治理体系研究”(项目编号:19ZDA164)的阶段性成果。
关键词
传播权
界权范式
法教义学
法的安定性
法律解释
communication rights
delineation paradigm
the certainty of law
legal dogmatics
legal interpretation
