论文部分内容阅读
英文侵权行为领域的研究文献中,经常出现“infringement”和“tort”两个含义接近的词,我国学者把它们均译为“侵权”。有学者认为,“infringement”表示主观上不要求有过错的侵权行为类型,即为无过错责任侵权行为;“tort”表示主观上要求有过错的侵权行为类型,即过错责任侵权行为类型。文章通过考查美国相关文献对这两个词的用法发现,上述理解并不确切。在英美法系,“infringement”一词专用于知识产权侵权,“tort”一词泛指一切类型的侵权行为,“tort”与“infringement”并无区分责任构成要件的功能。
In the research literature of English tort, often there are two words “infringement” and “tort” which are close in meaning, and our scholars have translated them into “infringement”. Some scholars believe that “infringement ” means that the subjective does not require a fault type of tort, that is, faultless tort liability; “tort ” said subjectively require a fault of tort types, namely, fault liability tort Types of. By examining the use of these two terms in the relevant American literature, the article finds that the above understanding is not clear. In Anglo-American law, the term “infringement” is used exclusively for infringement of intellectual property. The term “tort” refers to all types of infringement. There is no distinction between “tort” and “infringement” Function