| Summary: | 碩士 === 雲林科技大學 === 科技法律研究所 === 96 === New science and technology have conflict with copyrights in this digital world, and the present copyright system in our country cannot catch up advanced development, either.
Neighboring right is the legal system which has taken the initiative in adapting changeable science and technology. Besides, it plays an important role in Civil Law System. The copyright law in Taiwan has inherited Civil Law System and we have participated in WTO on January 1, 2002. As a member, it’s our responsibility to obey related conventions. Article 14 of the TRIPS and WPPT have regulated protection rules on performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations. Our neighboring right doesn’t match the international convention. To correct this mistake, this thesis has focused on relevant approaches and theories among international society and major countries.
By this chance, this study also concerns about databases. Developed countries have realized the importance of database protection because information explosion has resulted from rapid growth of database industry. Meanwhile, database entrepreneurs devote a number of manpower and money to cultural inheritance and improvement by adding personal creativity. For economical incentive and cultural continuation, it is imperative tendency for European Union and United States to legislate protection for databases in recent years. However, the U.S. has changed protection of databases to unfair competition right which differs from Sui Generis right in European Union. The thesis discusses and compares those two kinds of legislative patterns for protecting databases for choosing the best way for our country.
The content introduces the importance of neighboring right to the Civil Law System and compared it with international conventions and the same system in Japan for the first part. Furthermore, we try to resolve of plights on protection of databases and identify worth trying legislative modes according to theories of exclusive property and unfair competition. Meanwhile, we discuss possible disadvantages about representative legislation related to protection of databases among these two different systems and introduce practical adoption in European Union and United States. Finally, we focus on establishing neighboring right to complement our copyright system and give suggestions on subsuming practicable measures for protection of databases by expanding the scope of neighboring right.
|
|---|
