思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005

思想與表達之區別及合併攸關電腦程式侵權之判斷,惟表達是否包含非文字之結構?電腦程式之非文字成分是否屬於表達?思想與表達之區別原則適用於著作之非文字成分之結構時,判斷之基準為何?電腦程式之結構在何種情況因思想與表達之合併而不受著作權法保護?電腦程式之著作權侵權判之步驟為何?我國司法實務見解不一。本文即以最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決為基礎,分析美國著作權法對非文字成分之思想與表達區別之基準,再解析美國著作權法權威案例Altai案三步驟測試法之精義,並闡釋思想與表達區分及合併在兩個案例中運用之精微。結論則比較研析我國司法實務爭點之所在,釐清相關疑義,期使讀者對此問題之觀察臻於全面。...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: 羅明通 Ming-Tung Lo
Format: Article
Language:zho
Published: National Chiao Tung University 2009-12-01
Series:Kējì Fǎxué Pínglùn
Subjects:
SSO
Online Access:http://www-old.itl.nctu.edu.tw/tlr_n/papers/ch_paper/6_2/6_2_1.pdf
id doaj-787a47e329df4e52996b3ad6238a55e5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-787a47e329df4e52996b3ad6238a55e52020-11-25T00:48:15ZzhoNational Chiao Tung UniversityKējì Fǎxué Pínglùn1811-30952009-12-0162140思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005羅明通 Ming-Tung Lo0國立交通大學科技法律研究所兼任副教授、台英國際商務法律事務所主持律師;英國利淵大學法學博士思想與表達之區別及合併攸關電腦程式侵權之判斷,惟表達是否包含非文字之結構?電腦程式之非文字成分是否屬於表達?思想與表達之區別原則適用於著作之非文字成分之結構時,判斷之基準為何?電腦程式之結構在何種情況因思想與表達之合併而不受著作權法保護?電腦程式之著作權侵權判之步驟為何?我國司法實務見解不一。本文即以最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決為基礎,分析美國著作權法對非文字成分之思想與表達區別之基準,再解析美國著作權法權威案例Altai案三步驟測試法之精義,並闡釋思想與表達區分及合併在兩個案例中運用之精微。結論則比較研析我國司法實務爭點之所在,釐清相關疑義,期使讀者對此問題之觀察臻於全面。 The dichotomy and merger between idea and expression is highly related to the judgment of the infringement of computer program. Shall the expression be limited to literal element of work? Can the non-literal element of computer program possibly be categorized as expression? If it is possible, then what is the criterion for drawing such a distinction? Under what kind of circumstances, can the expression be regarded s having been merged with idea? And what is the process to make such a judgment of infringement? In this regard Taiwan judicial decisions have submitted different opinions. Based upon Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005, this article analyze the criterion for the distinction between idea and expression, and then analyze the contents of the three-step procedure by which judges in Altai applied the principle of the dichotomy and merger between idea and expression to decide the infringement. Finally, in conclusion, this article makes some comments on relevant mentioned above cases, serving as a reference for readers to have a panoramic observation. http://www-old.itl.nctu.edu.tw/tlr_n/papers/ch_paper/6_2/6_2_1.pdfWhelan案Lotus案Altai案SSO結構―次序―組織思想與表達解構―過濾―抽離三步驟測試法非文字成分WhelanLotusAltaiStructure-Sequence-OrganizationIdea and ExpressionDissection-Filtering-AbstractionThree-Part TestThree-Pronged TestNon-Literal Elements
collection DOAJ
language zho
format Article
sources DOAJ
author 羅明通 Ming-Tung Lo
spellingShingle 羅明通 Ming-Tung Lo
思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005
Kējì Fǎxué Pínglùn
Whelan案
Lotus案
Altai案
SSO
結構―次序―組織
思想與表達
解構―過濾―抽離
三步驟測試法
非文字成分
Whelan
Lotus
Altai
Structure-Sequence-Organization
Idea and Expression
Dissection-Filtering-Abstraction
Three-Part Test
Three-Pronged Test
Non-Literal Elements
author_facet 羅明通 Ming-Tung Lo
author_sort 羅明通 Ming-Tung Lo
title 思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005
title_short 思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005
title_full 思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005
title_fullStr 思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005
title_full_unstemmed 思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 The Distinction and Merger Between Expression and Idea and the Steps to Decide the Infringement of Computer Program - An Analysis of the Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005
title_sort 思想與表達之區別,合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟 ― 最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析 the distinction and merger between expression and idea and the steps to decide the infringement of computer program - an analysis of the supreme court criminal judgment no. 94-tai-shang-tze-1530, 2005
publisher National Chiao Tung University
series Kējì Fǎxué Pínglùn
issn 1811-3095
publishDate 2009-12-01
description 思想與表達之區別及合併攸關電腦程式侵權之判斷,惟表達是否包含非文字之結構?電腦程式之非文字成分是否屬於表達?思想與表達之區別原則適用於著作之非文字成分之結構時,判斷之基準為何?電腦程式之結構在何種情況因思想與表達之合併而不受著作權法保護?電腦程式之著作權侵權判之步驟為何?我國司法實務見解不一。本文即以最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決為基礎,分析美國著作權法對非文字成分之思想與表達區別之基準,再解析美國著作權法權威案例Altai案三步驟測試法之精義,並闡釋思想與表達區分及合併在兩個案例中運用之精微。結論則比較研析我國司法實務爭點之所在,釐清相關疑義,期使讀者對此問題之觀察臻於全面。 The dichotomy and merger between idea and expression is highly related to the judgment of the infringement of computer program. Shall the expression be limited to literal element of work? Can the non-literal element of computer program possibly be categorized as expression? If it is possible, then what is the criterion for drawing such a distinction? Under what kind of circumstances, can the expression be regarded s having been merged with idea? And what is the process to make such a judgment of infringement? In this regard Taiwan judicial decisions have submitted different opinions. Based upon Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 94-Tai-Shang-Tze-1530, 2005, this article analyze the criterion for the distinction between idea and expression, and then analyze the contents of the three-step procedure by which judges in Altai applied the principle of the dichotomy and merger between idea and expression to decide the infringement. Finally, in conclusion, this article makes some comments on relevant mentioned above cases, serving as a reference for readers to have a panoramic observation.
topic Whelan案
Lotus案
Altai案
SSO
結構―次序―組織
思想與表達
解構―過濾―抽離
三步驟測試法
非文字成分
Whelan
Lotus
Altai
Structure-Sequence-Organization
Idea and Expression
Dissection-Filtering-Abstraction
Three-Part Test
Three-Pronged Test
Non-Literal Elements
url http://www-old.itl.nctu.edu.tw/tlr_n/papers/ch_paper/6_2/6_2_1.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT luómíngtōngmingtunglo sīxiǎngyǔbiǎodázhīqūbiéhébìngjídiànnǎochéngshìqīnquánpànduànzhībùzhòuzuìgāofǎyuàn94niándùtáishàngzìdì1530hàoxíngshìpànjuépíngxīthedistinctionandmergerbetweenexpressionandideaandthestepstodecidetheinfringementofcomput
_version_ 1725256991371165696