版權法上的審美判斷

Aesthetic Determinations in Copyright Law

“審美非歧視性”理論認為，由於審美判斷的主觀性和法官能力的局限性，法官不應對作品作出審美價值上的判斷。但是，法官在版權案件中常常不得不進行相關的審美判斷，並且自覺或不自覺地運用各種審美理論。由於藝術作品的審美判斷區分了版權與工業產權的保護範圍、維護著版權保護體系的內在協調，除非屬於版權法明確規定的非藝術類客體（如軟件、數據庫等），法院就不得不考慮作品的藝術性或審美意義，為此有必要為法官正確選擇合適的審美理論提供理論依據。“藝術共同體”標準是法官選擇審美理論的重要依據。“藝術共同體”通過對作品形式、作者和讀者的審美解讀可以形成一致的審美判斷，並體現於作品藝術形式的判斷與藝術價值的判斷之中。

Aesthetic Non-discrimination theory holds that judges evaluating issues of copyrightability should not take into account the aesthetic quality of the works because of the subjectivity of aesthetic opinions and incompetent judges for aesthetics. However, judges, being aware of it or not, have little choice but do aesthetic determinations because such judgement is required by copyright law for 'art' or 'aesthetic meaning', and under some circumstance, assess the artistic contributions belong in the useful article, determining authorship and originality, and making aesthetic judgement to evaluate the substantial similarity between works of plaintiff and defendant. Aesthetic judgement assess the overall character of the work to determine whether it is eligible for copyright protection or industrial property protection, and harmonize the different protection between the author's right and related rights. Thus, the critical issue is not to eliminate the subjectivity of aesthetic determinations, but to provide guides for judges making choice among different aesthetic theories. The 'artistic commonwealth' standard, which can make an objective and consistent aesthetic determinations through forms of works, authors' intent and reader's response, is a relatively desirable solution for judges. Meanwhile, judges must realize that the aesthetic biases would hinder the artistic innovation.