重回合理使用現場──解構美國聯邦最高法院依個案「客製化」合理使用分析之影響

Returning to the Fair Use Scene: Deconstructing the Impact of the US Supreme Court’s“Customized”Fair Use Analysis on a Case-by-Case Basis

美國聯邦最高法院於2021年做成Google v. Oracle案，2023年又做成了Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith，而此兩案所涉之著作類別正屬於著作權保護標的之光譜的兩個極端：一為本質上具有功能性之電腦程式著作；另一則為須投入高度人類精神創意表現之藝術著作，著作權合理使用四項判斷基準仍能一體適用嗎？美國聯邦最高法院作為最終的裁量者，其於判決中做成或採用之「rule of law」（判例法律原則）對所有下級法院有拘束力，但在下級法院各自再就「個案基礎自由適用」下，竟可能產生完全相反的結果。本文之研究目的在於重新整理美國聯邦最高法院Sony案、Harper & Row案、Campbell案、Google案、及AWF案判決，於因應個案事實特殊性所為之合理使用分析下所做成或採用之rule of law對後續及下級法院所生之影響。從本質上具功能性之電腦程式、實用性物品等，到高度創意表達之藝術創作、挪用藝術等予以類型化，並從中辨識出各rule of law被後續法院適用之情況，尤其著重於比較在類似案件中卻有相反適用結果、上級審以完全不同的分析方式駁回下級審之判決、或美國聯邦最高法院主審意見與不同意見間之差異等，以及合理使用四項要件於各類別中所占之重要性，試以釐清不同類別之不同利用方式是否應有不同之權重組合，以期得到合理使用四項要件之最適權衡模式。

The U.S. Supreme Court issued the Google v. Oracle decision in 2021, and ruled on Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith (hereafter: AWF) in May of 2023. The impact of these two cases is far-reaching. However, the types of works involved in the two cases of Google and AWF belong to the two extremes of the spectrum of copyright laws: one is computer program works that are functional in nature; the other is an artistic work that requires a high level of creative expression of the human spirit, can the four criteria of copyright fair use doctrine be applied in no difference?
As the ultimate arbiter of the judicial system, the U.S. Supreme Court makes or adopts the“rule of law”in its judgment that is binding on all lower courts. However, under the condition that the lower courts“freely apply case by case”, the completely opposite result of lower courts’decisions could be occurred. The research purpose of this article is to reorganize the impact of the rule of law, which made or adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Sony, Harper & Row, Campbell, Google, and the pending case AWF, under the fair use analysis in response to the particularity of the facts of the case, on subsequent and lower courts.
Based on the case law researches that the author has explored in the past 20 years, the main object of this article to categorized the spectrum of fair use cases, namely, in the one end are the essentially functional works such as computer program works, useful article, etc. to the other end which are the highly creative artistic creations, appropriation art, parody, satirical remarks, etc. This article attempt to identify between the“high-water mark”application model in which the rule of law being over-extended by subsequent courts, and the model that is distinguished as“difficult to apply”, and the weightings of each fair use element in each category, try to clarify whether there should be different weight combinations for different utilization methods of different categories, in order to obtain the optimal balance model in applying the four elements of fair use.