由“翻船体”事件论漫画作品独创性标准的认定——对“漫画作品是美术作品”命题的反思

On the Determination of the Originality Standard of Cartoon Creation in the Sight of "Shipwrecking style" Incident——The Rethinking of the Proportion "Cartoon Work Is the Work of Visual Art"

"翻船体"事件带来的"字"与"画"的分歧揭示了漫画作品独创性标准认定不明确的问题。司法实践中,漫画作品因符合《著作权法实施条例》第四条第(八)项对美术作品的规定被认定为美术作品。然而漫画作品不仅是对"美感"的独创性表达,更是以表达一定的"寓意内容"为目的,后者的独创性正是前者独创性的基础,认定漫画作品的独创性标准应当包含其对"内容"与"美感"的表达,因此,"漫画作品是美术作品"的命题并不准确。对漫画作品独创性标准的认定不明大大降低了漫画作品的侵权成本,导致侵权行为增多,以及实践中难以对侵权行为的性质进行界定。立法、司法机关应当对漫画作品的独创性标准问题进行反思,以立法、司法解释或指导案例的方式予以明确。

The divergence between ＂script＂ and ＂painting＂ brought by ＂Shipwrecking style＂ incident revealed a problem that the identification of originality standard of cartoon creations. In juridical practices, cartoon creations are determined as work of visual art since it is in accordance with the definition of work of visual art by Term（VIII） of Article Four of Implementing Regulations of the Copyright Law. However, cartoon creation not only is original expression of ＂aesthetic＂, but also aims at expressing certain ＂implied connotation＂, and the originality of the latter is the basis for that of the former. The standard of recognizing the originality of cartoon creation should include its expression of ＂connotation＂ and ＂aesthetic＂. Therefore, the proposition ＂cartoon work is the work of visual art＂ is not accurate enough. The undefined determination of standard of cartoon＇s originality does not only greatly reduces the cost of infringe cartoons, but also result in increase of infringement, and the difficulty to define infringement in practice. Legislative and judicial authorities should rethink about the originality standard of cartoon creations, and define and determine it through legislative or judicial interpretation and guiding cases.