摘要
《刑法修正案(十一)》将“规避著作权技术措施行为”单列罪状,避免因扩大解释“复制发行”导致刑民脱节的尴尬局面,能够实现良好的社会效果和法律效果。然而此次修法禁止“直接规避行为”而忽略“提供规避手段行为”,不仅缺乏对“直接规避行为”的刑法规制必要性的切实考量,还因缺少对“提供规避手段行为”的明令禁止而显著降低了对著作权技术措施的保护力度,使该条款形同虚设。对此,应立法修正将认定规避著作权技术措施行为构成犯罪的情形仅限于“提供规避手段行为”。
The Amendment(XI)to the Criminal Law lists the"circumvention of copyright technical measures"as a separate crime,avoiding the embarrassing situation of the separation between the criminal law and the civil law due to the expanded interpretation of"reproduction and distribution",which can achieve good social and legal effects.However,this Amendment prohibits"direct circumvention"and neglects"provision of circumvention means",which not only lacks practical consideration of the necessity of criminal law regulation on"direct circumvention",but also significantly reduces the protection of copyright technical measures due to the lack of regulation on"provision of circumvention means",which makes this provision in name only.In this regard,we should amend the legislation to limit the circumstances that the act of circumventing copyright technical measures constitutes a crime to"the act of providing circumvention means".
作者
周邦朝
温捷潇
Zhou Bangchao;Wen Jiexiao
出处
《北京政法职业学院学报》
2022年第4期43-48,共6页
Journal of Beijing College of Politics and Law
关键词
刑法规制
著作权技术措施
规避行为
criminal law regulation
copyright technological measures
circumvention