“避风港”条款的法哲学分析被引量：1

Philosophical Analysis of "Safe Harbor" Provision

下载PDF

导出

摘要自从美国《新千年数字版权法案》第512条规定了"避风港"条款以来,虽然版权人对该条款诟病颇多,但并未能阻止各国立法者相继将该条款引入本国版权法。实现正义是所有立法应当遵循的目标,也是所有立法能够得到普遍遵守的保障。"避风港"条款之所以具有旺盛的生命力,概是因为其实现了立法目的指向中的法律正义、立法责任分担中的法律正义与立法价值追求中的法律正义。 since DCMA 512 stipulated the ＂safe harbor＂ provision, the criticism about this provision has been fierce, but it cannot prevent the other nations＇ legislators from bringing this provision to their own copyright law. Achieving justice is not only the aim of all legislation, but also an insurance of keeping the legislation generally obeyed. The vigorous vitality of ＂safe harbor＂ provision all originates from its realization of legal justice in legislative aims, responsibility distribution and legislative value.

作者王杰

机构地区中南财经政法大学知识产权中心

出处《佛山科学技术学院学报（社会科学版）》 2011年第1期16-19,共4页 Journal of Foshan University(Social Science Edition)

基金教育部新世纪优秀人才支持计划项目(NCET-10-0777)

关键词 “避风港”条款工具公平公益 ＂safe harbor＂provision instrument equity public interests

分类号 D90 [政治法律—法学理论]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献6

1冯晓青.著作权法之激励理论研究——以经济学、社会福利理论与后现代主义为视角[J].法律科学（西北政法大学学报）,2006,24(6):41-49. 被引量：45
2Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc[EB/OL]. [2010-07-09]. http://international, westlaw, com/find/default. wl? rs=WLIN11.01&fn =top&sv=Split&findjuris=00001&mt=1261&cite=510 + U. S. + 517&vr= 2. 0&rp%2ffind%2fdefault. wl&sp=zhongnuel-2000.
3FISHER William. Promises to keep: Technology, Law, and the Future of Entertainment[M]. Stan-ford: Stanford University Press, 2004 : 26.
4邱聪智.新订民法——债编通则[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.2003:107.
5E·博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004:298.
6DOUGLAS Lichtman, WILLIAM Landes. Indirect Liability for Copyright Infringement: An Economic Perspective[J]. Harvard Journal of Law and Tech-nology, 2003(1).

二级参考文献22

1[英]坎南编.《关于法律、警察、岁入及军备的演讲》.陈福生,陈振骅译.商务印书馆,1962年版，第260页
2Adam Smith, Lectures on Jurisprudence; Report of 1762 - 63, in Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nnations 754 n. 69 (1776).
3Information Infrastructure Task Force, Intellectual Property and the Natinal Information Infrastructure: The Report of the Working Group On Intellectual Property Rights7, 14 (1995).
4Mazer v. Stein 347 U.S. 201, 219 (1954)
5Rockford Map Publishers v. Directory Serv. Co. of Colo, 768 F. 2d 145, 148 (7th Cir. 1985)476
6U.S. 1061 (1986).
7Stewart v. Abend, 495 U.S. 207, 228 29 (1990).
817 U.S.C. 106- 106A (1994).
9National Business Lists, Inc. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc, 552 F. Supp. 89 (N. D. Ⅲ. 1982)
10Squires, Copyright and Compilations in the Computer Era: Old Wine in New Bottles, 24 BULL. COPYRIGHT SOC' Y U.S.A. 18, 44 - 45 (1977).