人民參與審判制度下的刑事鑑定——以日本裁判員制度下的責任能力判斷為探討核心數位著作權誘引侵權責任之檢討

Rethinking Inducement Liability of Copyright Law in Digital Age

我國於2007 年通過著作權修正法案引進美國聯邦最高法MGMStudios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.案所創造的著作權誘引侵權責任理論，試圖解決網際網路中因點對點傳輸方式所造成的著作權侵害問題。誠然數位時代網際網路無遠弗屆的傳播能力已經對著作權人造成了極大的威脅，但也為著作權人創造機會。誘引侵權責任的引進對於規範傳播工具而言是否恰當呢？會不會阻礙大眾使用或接觸文化公共財的機會，反而不利國家文化發展？儘管科技的發展確實有利於著作物的傳播，諸如此類的疑慮卻一直存在，也讓各國立法機關及司法系統絞盡腦汁，希望能在兼顧著作權人個人保護與國家文化之發展。本文將利基於傳統著作權理論，重新檢視數位時代著作權變革的妥適性，是否形成對著作財產權過度的保護或違反我國著作權法第一條所揭示的立法目的；並且希望透過本文的分析研究，能為我國未來著作權法的發展貢獻一己之力。

Taiwan passed 2007 amendments of copyright law that refers to Grokster case against one who provides the public computer programs or other technology that can be used to publicly transmit or reproduce works, with the intent to allow the public to infringe economic rights by means of public transmission or reproduction by means of the Internet of the works of another. The dramatic technological change, however, is almost completely beyond lawmakers’ predications. What can copyright law do with those who develop and distribute new technology for file-sharing? Regulating the bad behaviors over Internet network which changes with each passing day has become a dilemma to balance author’s right and the public’s use. Despite of the challenge, technological advances have also created opportunities for reformation of legal system. Indeed, the problems we confront are leading us to rethink the relationship between law and technology. This article would analyze the dilemma in light of technological advances that would bring us unprecedented changes and suggest legislators particularly play a positive role to pursue the best public benefits rather than strike an appropriate balance between protecting copyright and protecting the innovation of useful technology.