法教义学视野下技术措施保护规则的刑民衔接路径
The Path for Criminal-Civil Interface on the Protection Rules of Technological Measures From the Perspective of Legal Dogmatics
杨馥铭1
作者信息
摘要
比较现行《著作权法》和《刑法》有关保护技术措施的规则可以发现,两者在保护的技术措施类型和规制的行为类型方面都存在一定程度的"刑民脱节"现象.运用法教义学方法填补法律漏洞、化解规范矛盾、完善法律体系对于构建技术措施保护规则的刑民衔接机制具有重要意义.在数字网络环境下,将"浏览"解释为"读取"并未超出其可能含义的边界.任何对作品的数字化复制活动和对计算机软件的运行过程都必然会经过"读取"作品信息的阶段,该阶段可被视为对作品的"浏览".因此,防复制措施和防运行措施可以被归入"用于防止、限制未经权利人许可浏览作品的有效技术、装置或部件",属于《著作权法》的保护对象."破坏"的本质是使事物失去应有效用,向公众提供规避手段可被视为对技术措施的"破坏",因而可以构成侵犯著作权罪.
Abstract
Comparing the current provisions of the PRC Copyright Law and the PRC Criminal Law on the protection of technological measures,it can be found that there is a certain degree of"disconnection"both in the types of protected technological measures and the types of regulated behaviors.The application of legal dogmatics methods to fill legal loopholes,resolve contradictions of norms,and improve the legal system is of great significance for constructing criminal-civilinterface on the protection of technological measures.In the digital network environment,interpreting"browsing"as"reading"does not exceed its possible meanings.Any digital copying and software operation will inevitably go through the stage of"reading"the information of the work,which can be regarded as"browsing"the work.Therefore,anti-duplication measures and anti-operation measures can be classified as"the effective technologies,devices or parts used to prevent and restrict the browsing of any work",which is protected by the PRC Copyright Law.The essence of"destruction"is to render things useless.Providing the public with means to circumventtechnological measures can be regarded as"destruction"of technological measures and it can constitute the crime of copyright infringement.
关键词
技术措施/刑民衔接/法教义学Key words
Technological Measures/Criminal-Civil Interface/Legal Dogmatics引用本文复制引用
出版年
2024
NETL
NSTL
万方数据