合理使用认定中“转换性使用”的重新界定——基于“戈德史密斯案”白的思考

The New Interpretations of“Transformative Use”for Determining Fair Use ——Some Reflections on“AWF v.Goldsmith”

美国最高法院2023年就沃霍尔基金会诉戈德史密斯案作出终审判决,为版权合理使用规则提供了最新的司法判例,也因其改变了“转换性使用”标准的理解与适用而受到广泛关注。美国的版权合理使用规则已被纳入制定法,但它在本质上是一项普通法规则,因此,判例对其形成、发展、解释与适用具有重要意义。本文首先介绍该案的基本事实,分析大法官之间对于版权合理使用的第一个要素,特别是关于转换性认定的争议,以及其各自观点。其次,针对转换性使用在合理使用多要素分析方法中的地位以及扩张趋势,本文结合戈德史密斯案,重点评析美国最高法院就转换性使用所提出的新规则,包括限定它的适用对象、范围与条件,否定了仅凭后续作品具有“不同的表达、含义或者信息”即可认定转换性的标准,当后续作品与原作的使用具有相同或者实质性相似的目的时,必须提供其他独立的正当理由。最后,基于“遵循先例”规则,本文认为美国最高法院并没有推翻由坎贝尔案所确立的转换性使用,但是它通过新的判例,在很大程度上重新界定了转换性使用。戈德史密斯案为理解美国的版权合理使用规则以及转换性使用提供了新材料与新视角,对于其他法域的版权限制制度也具有比较法上的参考意义。

The U.S.Supreme Court's final decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts,Inc.v.Goldsmith in 2023 provides the latest judicial precedent for the fair use doctrine of copyright,and this case has also attracted widespread attention for its change in the understanding and application of the"transformative use"standard.The copyright fair use doctrine in the United States has been incorporated into statutory provisions,but it is essentially a common law doctrine,and therefore precedents are of great significance to its formation,development,interpretation and application.This paper first introduces the basic facts of the case,focusing on the first element of fair use doctrine,especially the different opinions among Justices over this element and their respective reasons.Secondly,in view of the status and expansion trend of transformative use in the multi-factor test of fair use doctrine,this paper focuses on the analysis of the new rules proposed by the Supreme Court on transformative use in light of AWF v.Goldsmith,including the limitation of its applicable objects,scope and conditions,and denies the standard that transformative use can be determined only because the secondary work has"different expressions,meanings or messages",and when the use of the secondary work and the original work has the same or substantially similar purpose,other independent justifications must be provided.Finally,based on the stare decisis rule,this paper argues that the U.S.Supreme Court did not overturn the transformative use established by Campbell,but it redefined transformative use to a large extent through new precedents.The case of AWF v.Goldsmith provides new material and a new perspective for understanding the fair use doctrine and transformative use in the United States,and also has comparative law reference for the copyright limitation system in other jurisdictions.