著作权客体法定疏证——兼论“非典型作品”的保护

Explanation of the Copyright Object Legalization——Focusing on the Protection of“Atypical Works”

著作权作为一项绝对权,客体必须法定,但这并不意味着作品类型也需要法定。随着科学技术的进步,艺术成果的繁荣,催生出更多的“非典型作品”,如果得不到适当保护,无异于削足适履。与此同时,从利益平衡的角度上看,对“非典型作品”提供著作权保护需谨慎,不能随意扩张著作权保护范围。因此有必要梳理著作权客体法定与作品类型法定化的真实含义,回应技术更迭、社会发展所带来的新型客体的保护问题。从比较法的角度来看,大多数国家版权法对作品类型没有加以限定,而是采用示例性、开放式列举。坚持作品构成要件的法定性,通过严格的演绎推理将非典型作品纳入作品的保护范畴不失为一种较好的解决途径。

As an absolute right,the copyright object must be statutory,but this does not mean that the types of works also needs to be statutory.With the progress of science and technology and the prosperity of artistic achievements,more and more“atypical works”are produced.At the same time,from the perspective of balance of interests,we should be cautious in providing copyright protection for“atypical works”,and should not expand the scope of copyright protection at will.Therefore,it is necessary to sort out the real meaning of the copyright object legalization and the work type legalization,in response to the protection of new object brought by the technological change and social development.From the perspective of comparative law,most copyright laws across the globe do not limit the types of works,but use the illustrative,open enumeration.It is a good solution to insist on the legal nature of the constitutive elements of works and to protect the atypical works in the category of the work through strict deductive reasoning.