發(fā)布時間：2018-05-06 20:55

  本文選題：《視聽表演北京條約》 + 表演者權利��； 參考：《西南政法大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：2012q年6月《視聽表演北京條約》的問世，是表演者權利保護歷史上又一具有里程碑意義的大事。《視聽表演北京條約》的一個亮點是在表演者權利轉讓——這一困擾保護視聽表演國際條約制定工作多年的問題上形成了突破。著作權法傳統(tǒng)上意義上的“表演者”是指“以各種方式表演文學藝術作品的人”。1如果沒有歌手的演唱和舞者展現(xiàn)舞蹈動作，音樂作品與舞蹈作品是無法呈現(xiàn)給公眾的。而對于由文字構成的戲劇劇本和電影劇本而言缺少演員的表演，劇本中的故事情節(jié)是無法淋漓盡致地展現(xiàn)。國際社會逐漸達成共識，表演者對于傳播作品發(fā)揮著不可比擬的關鍵作用，因此“表演者權利”作為鄰接權中的權利類型也逐漸得到了各國著作權立法和國際條約的承認。 但是，保護表演者權利的三大國際條約《保護表演者、音像制品制作者和廣播組織的國際公約》(Rome International Convention for the Protection ofPerformers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations)（以下簡稱“羅馬公約”）、《與貿(mào)易有關的知識產(chǎn)權協(xié)議》（Agreement On Trade-relatedAspects of Intellectual Property Right）（以下簡稱“TRIPS協(xié)定”）以及《世界知識產(chǎn)權組織表演和錄音制品條約》（WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty）（以下簡稱“WPPT”）均未對視聽表演者的“表演者權利”問題進行規(guī)定。 以往的國際條約為什么對以視聽形式錄制和傳播的表演未提供全面的保護？為什么在保護視聽表演者權利的問題上美國和歐共體存在激烈的利益博弈？若缺乏對上述問題清楚的了解與認識，就不能明確《視聽表演北京條約》中關鍵條款的含義內涵以及我國在批準加人條約之后應當承擔的國際義務是什么。故此，研究《視聽表演北京條約》表演者權利轉讓問題不僅具有理論價值，也具有重要的現(xiàn)實意義。 本文除引言和結語外，全文共分為四個部分，二萬余字。 第一部分“表演者權利轉讓導論”。主要分析了表演者權利轉讓所涉及轉讓客體——表演者權利，以及表演者權利轉讓規(guī)則。 第二部分“《視聽表演北京條約》中的表演者權利轉讓條款的制定”。這一部分，筆者對《視聽表演北京條約》簽署前國際條約中對表演者權利轉讓條款的規(guī)定進行了概述，并簡要介紹了《視聽表演北京條約》制定的背景和過程。 第三部分“《視聽表演北京條約》表演者權利轉讓條款解釋”。在這一部分筆者借用WTO爭端解決機制的常用解釋條文的方法——《維也納條約法公約》第31、32條的規(guī)定，對《視聽表演北京條約》表演者權利轉讓條款進行了詳細的分析和解釋。 第四部分“表演者權利轉讓條款對我國的啟示”。在這一部分，筆者首先通過對《著作權法》修改草案中有關表演者權利轉讓內容的條款進行合理性反思，然后得出修改二稿中關于職務表演的規(guī)定是符合《視聽表演北京條約》的、修改二稿中權利轉讓規(guī)定需要“矯正”的結論，并闡明《視聽表演北京條約》權利轉讓條款對我國的啟示。 在研究方法上，本文主要運用了比較研究方法、歷史研究方法、法律解釋學方法和實證研究方法。在理解《視聽表演北京條約》權利轉讓條款的概念和基本特征上，筆者運用比較研究方法，客觀全面分析《視聽表演北京條約》權利轉讓條款與其他類似條款的關系，正確理解本文定義的權利轉讓條款的內涵。在關于《視聽表演北京條約》權利轉讓條款的法理分析上，筆者采用歷史研究的方法，對近代以來知識產(chǎn)權保護的路徑發(fā)展進行了客觀梳理和總結。在分析《視聽表演北京條約》權利轉讓條款對我國的啟示上筆者運用法律解釋學的方法和實證分析的方法，，通過法律解釋學方法對我國《著作權法》修改草案進行文本解讀與分析，對條款的內容，適用條件等加以闡明。
[Abstract]:The advent of the June Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance, 2012q, was another landmark in the history of performers' rights protection. A bright spot in the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance was a breakthrough in the issue of performers' rights transfer for many years. The tradition of copyright law was a breakthrough. "Performers" in the sense of "performers" are "people who perform literary and artistic works in a variety of ways".1 can not be presented to the public without singers and dancers to show the dance movements. The plot can not be demonstrated vividly. The international community has gradually reached a consensus, the performers play an incomparable role in disseminating the works, so the "performer's right", as a right type in the neighbouring right, has gradually been recognized by various countries' copyright legislation and international treaties.
However, the three major international treaties on the protection of performers' rights < protective performers, audio-visual products producers and broadcasting organizations' international conventions > (Rome International Convention for the Protection ofPerformers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting) (hereinafter referred to as the "Rome Convention"), < trade related knowledge production The Agreement On Trade-relatedAspects of Intellectual Property Right (hereinafter referred to as the "TRIPS agreement") as well as the world intellectual property organization performance and recording Treaty (WIPO Performances and Phonograms) (hereinafter referred to as "WIPO Performances") have not stipulated the "performer's rights" of the audio-visual performers.
Why did the previous international treaties provide no comprehensive protection for performances recorded and transmitted by audio-visual forms? Why the United States and the European community have a fierce interest game on the protection of the rights of audiovisual performers? If there is a lack of clear understanding and understanding of the above issues, the key clauses in the Beijing treaty of audio-visual performance can not be clearly defined. What is the connotation of the meaning and the international obligations that China should undertake after the ratification of the addition treaty. Therefore, it is not only of theoretical value but also of practical significance to study the issue of the transfer of the rights of performers in the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the paper is divided into four parts, more than 20000 words.
The first part is an introduction to the transfer of performers' rights. It mainly analyzes the object of the transfer of performers, the rights of performers and the transfer rules of performers' rights.
The second part, "the formulation of the performers' rights transfer clause in the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance". This part summarizes the provisions of the performers' rights transfer clauses in the international treaties before the signing of the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance, and briefly introduces the background and process of the formulation of the Beijing treaty of audio-visual performance.
The third part "the interpretation of the performers' rights transfer clause of the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance". In this part, the author borrows the provisions of the common interpretation of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, the provisions of article 31,32 of the Vienna Convention on the law of the Treaty of treaties, and gives a detailed analysis and explanation of the rights transfer clauses of the performers of the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance.
The fourth part is "the Enlightenment of the performer's rights transfer clause to our country". In this part, the author first gives a reasonable reflection on the terms of the performers' rights transfer in the copyright law, and then draws a conclusion that the provisions on the job performance in the revised two draft are in accordance with the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance, and the two draft is revised. The transfer of rights in China requires the conclusion of "correction" and the Enlightenment of the right transfer provisions of the Beijing Convention on audio-visual performance to China.
In the study method, this paper mainly uses comparative research methods, historical research methods, legal hermeneutics and empirical research methods. In understanding the concept and basic characteristics of the rights transfer clause in the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance, the author makes an objective and comprehensive analysis of the terms and conditions for the transfer of rights of the Treaty of visual and audio-visual performance in Beijing. The relation of other similar clauses correctly understands the connotation of the right transfer clause defined in this article. In the jurisprudential analysis of the Beijing Treaty of audio-visual performance, the author uses the method of historical research to review and summarize the path development of the protection of intellectual property since modern times. In the analysis of the Beijing article of audio-visual performance, the author has analyzed and analyzed the course of the protection of intellectual property rights in modern times. The author uses the method of legal hermeneutics and the method of empirical analysis to enlighten our country by the method of legal hermeneutics and the text interpretation and analysis of the revised draft of copyright law in China through legal hermeneutics, and clarifies the contents and applicable conditions of the terms.

【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.41

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 王遷;暴風雨下的安全港——美國《家庭娛樂與版權法案》評析[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2005年06期

2 吳漢東;國際化、現(xiàn)代化與法典化:中國知識產(chǎn)權制度的發(fā)展道路[J];法商研究;2004年03期

3 馬丹丹;;從利益平衡角度來看國際知識產(chǎn)權保護的現(xiàn)狀——兼論我國在利益失衡中的出路[J];法制與社會;2007年07期

4 王遷;;《視聽表演北京條約》爭議問題及對我國國際義務的影響[J];法學;2012年10期

5 王遷;;《視聽表演北京條約》視野下著作權法的修訂[J];法商研究;2012年06期

6 嘉齡;;視若無睹 中國群眾演員現(xiàn)狀調查[J];電影世界;2008年11期

7 馬利;;論《視聽表演北京條約》權利轉讓條款——兼論《中華人民共和國著作權法》視聽表演權利轉讓的修訂[J];社會科學;2012年11期

8 張燕;;電影版權與盜版應對[J];現(xiàn)代傳播(中國傳媒大學學報);2006年04期

9 尹新天;如何發(fā)揮知識產(chǎn)權制度的作用(上)——評英國知識產(chǎn)權委員會的報告[J];知識產(chǎn)權;2003年04期

10 宋慧獻,周艷敏;沖突與平衡:知識產(chǎn)權的人權視野[J];知識產(chǎn)權;2004年02期

本文編號：1853844