Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/101015


Title: 戲謔仿作(Parodie)與著作權保護
Other Titles: Parodywork and Protection of Copyright
Authors: 王怡蘋
Wang, I-Ping
Keywords: 戲謔仿作;著作財產權;著作人格權;合理使用原則;言論自由
Parody;copyright;moral right;fair use doctrine;freedom of expression
Date: 2013-06
Issue Date: 2016-08-31 17:10:36 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 前年上演的電影「帝國毀滅」,內容在描述希特勒自殺前最後十二天,其中希特勒投降前的片段,被網友配上字幕改編成「希特勒的XBOX360被鎖機」、「帝國毀滅-玩家被黑心農場陰」等搞笑影片,以及「希特勒聲援中華隊、搶救楊淑君!1『事件第一天』」充滿支持與鼓勵的影片。又如1997年美國藝術家Thomas Forsythe創作78幅攝影照片,系列名稱為“Food Chain Barbie”,攝影照片中的芭比娃娃以奇怪且多具有性色彩的姿勢呈現,例如“MaltedBarbie”中裸體芭比放置於麥芽機器中;或如“Fondue a laBarbie”將三顆芭比頭顱擺放於起士鍋中,藉由這些攝影照片Thomas Forsythe批判芭比娃娃物化女性,並痛批芭比娃娃塑造通俗的美麗神話,使社會將女性當成物品看待。此等戲謔仿作行為係以他人創作為基礎,藉由變更內容之方式,以達詼諧、諷刺等效果。依據我國著作權法規定,上述行為不僅涉及該影片著作權人的改作權、公開傳輸權等著作財產權,亦涉及同一性保持權之著作人格權。就著作財產權的部分而言,是否能因符合合理使用原則而不成立侵權責任,值得深究;至於著作人格權的部分,則因欠缺類似的規定而無法免除侵權責任。然我國著作權法第1條明定其立法目的為保障著作人著作權益、調和社會公共利益及促進國家文化發展,且憲法第11條保障言論自由:「人民有言論、講學、著作及出版之自由。」更凸顯戲謔仿作之合法性問題,因此,本文擬探討言論自由與著作權保護之衝突,並嘗試尋找其間之平衡。
Year before there is a movie called "Downfall" depicting the last twelve days of Hitler. The part of this movie is adapted by users into another short like "Hitler's XBOX360 has been locked" and "Hitler's solidarity with the Chinese Taipei team-rescue Yang Shu-Jun!". Another example is the American artist Thomas Forsythe created 78 photographs named "Food Chain Barbie" in 1997. The photo series presented Barbie with many ridiculous and sexual positions, such as "Malted Barbie" in which nude Barbie was placed in malt machine; "Fondue a la Barbie" in which three Barbie heads were placed in the cheese pot. With these photos Thomas Forsythe criticized that the Barbie doll materialized women and treat women as goods. He also denounced that the Barbie doll shape the popular myth of the beauty. These behaviors called "parody" created the new works based on the others in the way of changing part of the original content. According to the Copyright Law, the parody is not only involved copyright and also moral right such as the right of attribution and right of integrity. With the fair use doctrine the parody may not infringe copyright, but due to lack of similar provisions for moral right the parody will not be exempt from infringement. However, the first paragraph of Copyright Law stipulates that its purpose is to protect the interests of authors' works, to reconcile social and public interests and to promote the development of national culture. Furthermore the article 11 of our Constitution guarantees freedom of expression. Therefore, this paper intends to research the conflict between freedom of expression and copyright protection, and try to find a solution.
Relation: 政大智慧財產評論, 11(1), 1-29
NCCU Intellectual Property Review
Data Type: article
Appears in Collections:[智慧財產評論] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
index.html0KbHTML445View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing