發(fā)布時間：2018-05-06 07:47

  本文選題：工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計 + 著作權(quán)　； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：在這個“設(shè)計創(chuàng)造財富”的時代，產(chǎn)品的外觀設(shè)計最直觀、具體、貼近廣大消費者和企業(yè)。消費者越來越追求美和個性，促使外觀設(shè)計成為其購買產(chǎn)品的決定性因素，從而是實現(xiàn)產(chǎn)品的價值、占領(lǐng)市場的決定性因素。又由于外觀設(shè)計獲得保護的程序簡單、成本投入較低，維護成本低廉更加貼切商品經(jīng)濟時代產(chǎn)品更新速度快的特點，各個國家無不將其作為重要的國家發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略。但是工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計兼跨藝術(shù)和產(chǎn)業(yè)兩大領(lǐng)域，它既屬于工業(yè)產(chǎn)品的新設(shè)計，能夠受到專利法的保護；同時它是設(shè)計師具有獨創(chuàng)性的智力成果，可以得到著作權(quán)法的保護。外觀設(shè)計介于專利權(quán)和著作權(quán)之間，兩個獨立領(lǐng)域在實踐中產(chǎn)生了交叉。而我國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法律體系，似乎面面俱到，實則細密不足，，疏闊有余。加之法官之間、法院之間、法院與專利復(fù)審委之間、官方與學(xué)者間對于外觀設(shè)計專利法的理解不同，造成同類案件，法律適用的結(jié)果迥異，而其中也暴露出我們目前司法中所面臨的問題。 本文共分六個章節(jié)，第一部分為緒論部分。第二部分從工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計的司法典型案例中，分析工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計的司法現(xiàn)狀，從中剖析出司法實踐中所碰到的難題。第三部分：闡述了工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計概念法律化過程，以及工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計的概念、以及其與美術(shù)作品、實用藝術(shù)作品之間的關(guān)系。第四部分：是本文的重點章節(jié)，從理論和現(xiàn)實的角度對工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計專利法與著作權(quán)法重合的情形進行了分類，然后從理論的角度出發(fā)，分析工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計的新穎性標準與著作權(quán)的獨創(chuàng)性標準的不同，從外觀設(shè)計產(chǎn)品是不是著作權(quán)作品的復(fù)制的角度，探討著作權(quán)法保護與專利法保護客體的重合。第五部分：對國外關(guān)于工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計保護制度的介紹與評介。第六部分：對于現(xiàn)行機制下所產(chǎn)生的問題，進行工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計單純立法的可行性進行了否定，然后通過對工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計與著作權(quán)重合的不同情形采取了不同的保護模式，對完善現(xiàn)行解決機制提出一點自己的見解。
[Abstract]:In this "design to create wealth" era, product design is the most intuitive, specific, close to the majority of consumers and enterprises. Consumers are more and more pursuing beauty and personality, which makes appearance design become the decisive factor for them to buy products, which is the decisive factor to realize the value of products and occupy the market. Because of the simple procedure of protecting appearance design, low cost, low maintenance cost and fast updating speed of products in the age of commodity economy, every country regards it as an important national development strategy. However, industrial appearance design is not only a new design of industrial products and can be protected by patent law, but also a creative intellectual achievement of designers, which can be protected by copyright law. The design is between patent and copyright, and the two independent fields are intersected in practice. But our country intellectual property law system, seems to have all sides, in fact is detailed insufficient, sparse has more than. In addition, there are different understandings of the design patent law between the judges, the courts, the courts and the Patent Review Board, and between the officials and the scholars, resulting in different results of the application of the law in similar cases. And also exposed our current problems in the administration of justice. This paper is divided into six chapters, the first part is the introduction. The second part analyzes the judicial status of industrial design from the typical cases of industrial design, from which the problems encountered in judicial practice are analyzed. The third part: elaborated the industrial product appearance design concept legal process, as well as the industrial product appearance design concept, as well as its and the fine arts work, the practical art work relations. The fourth part: this article is the key chapter, from the theory and the reality angle, has carried on the classification to the industrial product appearance design patent law and the copyright law superposition, then from the theory angle, This paper analyzes the difference between the novelty standard of industrial design and the originality standard of copyright, and discusses the coincidence between copyright law protection and patent law protection object from the point of view of whether the design product is a copy of copyright work. Part V: introduction and review on the protection system of industrial design abroad. The sixth part: for the problems arising under the current mechanism, the feasibility of pure legislation of industrial product design is negated, and then different protection modes are adopted through the different cases of industrial design and copyright coincidence. To perfect the present solution mechanism puts forward own opinion.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923.4

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 杜蓓蕾;程萬華;;三種外觀設(shè)計保護模式之比較[J];中國發(fā)明與專利;2008年11期

2 胡余旺;;權(quán)利沖突的法哲學(xué)思考[J];河北法學(xué);2010年08期

3 馮曉青,馮曄;試論著作權(quán)法中作品獨創(chuàng)性的界定[J];華東政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;1999年05期

4 鄒元超;論工業(yè)設(shè)計的某些概念及誤區(qū)[J];建筑機械;1996年08期

5 王太平;工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計的法律保護模式[J];科技與法律;2002年03期

6 高翔;;淺析實用藝術(shù)品著作權(quán)與外觀設(shè)計專利權(quán)沖突與解決[J];科技風;2010年20期

7 楊建成;外觀設(shè)計專利侵權(quán)糾紛案件若干問題探討[J];人民司法;1998年05期

8 吳清旺;賀丹青;;利益衡平的法學(xué)本質(zhì)[J];法學(xué)論壇;2006年01期

9 李明德;美國對外觀設(shè)計及其相關(guān)權(quán)利的保護[J];外國法譯評;1998年01期

10 關(guān)儉科;;工業(yè)品外觀設(shè)計知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護若干問題探析[J];湘潭師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2007年02期

本文編號：1851422