著作權損害賠償之再建構：以德國法為借鏡

Remedies for Copyright Infringement

關於著作財產權侵害，依據我國著作權法第88條第2項與第3項規定，學說區分為五種計算方式：具體損害法（第2項第1款前段）、差額法（第2項第1款但書）、所得利益法（第2項第2款前段）、總銷售額法（第2項第2款但書）、由法院酌定賠償額（第3項）。其中具體損害法與差額法係著眼於被害人實際損害，立法精神上係延續民法第216條之規定，但所得利益法與總銷售額法係著眼於侵害人所得利益，此二項計算方式與法院酌定賠償額有別於民法侵權責任，其理由何在，又應如何操作方屬合理。有鑑於此，本文將透過案例分析，檢視實務運作模式與著作權法規範之妥適性，並探討損害賠償制度之基本精神。由於德國民事侵權損害賠償制度與我國相同，其著作權法關於損害賠償額計算之規定，亦提及三種方式：被害人之實際損害、交付侵害人之所得利益、類推授權，與我國著作權法規定部分相仿。因此，選擇以德國為研究對象，期能瞭解德國之運作模式，並進而就我國相關問題提出建議。

Under Section 2 and 3 of Article 88 of Taiwan’s Copyright Act, an infringement of economic rights shall give rise to three types of remedies, including the actual damages suffered by the injured party, the profits of the infringer and statutory damages. There exists an uncertainty over whether the spirit of copyright legislation relating to remedies for infringement remains consonant with that of the Civil Code, even though Subsection 1, Section 2 of Article 88 of Copyright Act refers to Article 216 of Civil Code. This article will examine the appropriateness of both actual practice and copyright legislation through case analysis. Furthermore, because of the similar Civil Code and Copyright Act in Germany, this article will introduce the regulations and practice in relating to remedies for infringement. With this comparative study this article may finally find solutions to the problems.