论文部分内容阅读
《安妮女王法》开启了著作权法制化之门,但由于这一立法范式的出现并非是由于立法者对于作者权利的重视和对于制度创新的追求,而纯粹是由于各方利益纠葛妥协的偶然产物。于是,《安妮女王法》在权利限制的条文中就采用了特殊的双轨制方式尝试协调书商之间的利益冲突,但对于两种不同的保护期限和权利性质,该法却又未做出任何的解释和交代,这就为后世著作权制度性质的置疑埋下了隐患。同时,《安妮女王法》的权利限制之困促使书商改变策略,以Midwinter v.Hamilton案的审理为标志,书商公会从寻求议会立法保护转向到法院寻求权利救济,并由此开始了延续30年的“书商之战”。其中,具有里程碑意义的Millar v.Taylor与Donaldson v.Beckett案,就直观细致地反映了著作权法制化自《安妮女王法》确立开端以来发展路径的选择,即著作权的权利类型化或制度体系化。且借由司法判决,英国法进一步确立了作者在著作权法表达中的中心位置,并真正确立了后世以作者为导向的著作权立法模式。也开启了著作权理论从面向立法的纯粹理论模式转变为面向司法的实用主义保护模式的最初进程。从另一种意义上说,著作权法制化的过程,就是对于权利主体的确认和选择的过程。权利内容基本框架的确立同权利主体的选择相关联,作者主体身份像幽灵一般始终萦绕在著作权法制化过程中。
The “Queen Anne Act” has opened the door to the legalization of copyright. However, this legislative paradigm is not due to the legislator’s emphasis on the author’s rights and the pursuit of institutional innovation, but purely due to the accidental compromise of interests of all parties . Thus, the “Queen Anne Act” in the provisions of the right to limit the use of a special two-track system to try to coordinate the conflicts of interest between booksellers, but for two different types of protection and the nature of the rights but did not make any Explanation and accountability, which buried the hidden dangers for the nature of the future copyright system. In the meantime, the quest for Queen Anne’s law has prompted booksellers to change their strategy, marked by the trial of the case of Midwinter v. Hamilton, and the bookseller’s association has moved from seeking the protection of parliamentary legislation to seeking court remedies for rights, beginning its continuation 30 years “war of booksellers ”. Among them, the landmark cases of Millar v.Taylor and Donaldson v.Beckett directly and carefully reflect the legal choice of the legalization of copyright since the beginning of the establishment of the “Queen Anne of France”, that is, the type of copyright or institutionalization of copyright . And by judicial decision, the English Law further establishes the author’s central position in the expression of copyright law, and truly establishes the later author-oriented copyright legislation model. It also opens up the initial process of transforming the theory of copyright from the pure theoretical model facing the legislation to the pragmatic protection model facing the judiciary. In another sense, the process of the legalization of copyright is the process of confirmation and choice of rights subjects. The establishment of the basic framework of rights content is related to the choice of rights subjects. The author’s identity as the ghost always linger in the legalization of copyright.