'Resident Evil' Stunt Performer Drops Injury Lawsuit in L.A. 惡靈古堡的特技演員撤回在洛杉磯的訴訟 Its possible, however, that Olivia Jackson may pursue the case elsewhere. Attorneys for British stunt performer Olivia Jackson have dropped a Los Angeles-based lawsuit against the makers of Resident Evil: The Final Chapter. 英國特技演員奧利佛傑克森的律師撤回對“惡靈古堡：最終章”之製作公司在洛杉磯的訴訟。 The defendant argued in the motion to dismiss that Jackson's stunt performer contract specifically includes a provision requiring dispute resolution in South Africa. So it's possible that Jackson may pursue the case elsewhere. 被告爭執到該特技演員契約內容明確規定，本契約如發生爭議其訴訟管轄地為南非，因此該特技演員可能在他地另行起訴。 In September 2016, during the filming of Resident Evil: The Final Chapter, in Cape Town, South Africa, Jackson was badly injured during a stunt. While riding a motorcycle at a high speed, the 34-year-old veteran stunt performer collided with a crane-mounted camera that was traveling in the opposite direction. Her left arm was amputated above the elbow and she suffered lasting nerve damage and facial scarring. 2016年9月，在南非開普敦拍攝上開影片期間，34歲特技演員傑可森在為特技時受了很重的傷。事發時以高速騎著摩托車與反向行進之吊掛攝影機相撞。左手臂手肘以下截肢，同時受有持續性神經損害及面部傷疤。 Jackson’s initial U.S lawsuit, filed in September 2019 in Los Angeles, alleged that Resident Evil director Paul W. Anderson and his longtime producing partner, Jeremy Bolt, were responsible, and requested unspecified damages. 傑克遜最初於2019年9月在美國洛杉磯起訴，主張“惡靈古堡”導演Paul W. Anderson及其長期合作夥伴Jeremy Bolt要對其受傷負責，同時要求未定額的損害賠償金。 “The dismissal of the lawsuit included no settlement or payment of any kind,” said Joseph R. Taylor, an attorney with Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz, the firm representing the defendants, which included director Anderson and producer Bolt, along with their respective production companies. “該訴訟無透過和解或給付任何金額而撤回，包括導演及製片和他們各自的製作公司” 代表被告的Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz律師事務所之 Joseph R. Taylor這樣說道。 Jackson’s attorneys didn’t respond to requests for comment. 傑克遜的律師對該上開陳述未做任何回應及評論。
Rights & Licenses 權利及授權 [Sender.Name] is requesting the exclusive right and license to utilize this name in connection with the advertisement, promotion, and sale of their product. This contract is an agreement for those rights and services with the following terms being in place. 被授權者（下稱甲）要求專屬權及被授權利用權利者（下稱乙）之姓名於廣告行銷與銷售產品。本契約係依根據下列條款所為係爭權利與服務之協議。 [Endorser.Name] will provide rights for [Sender.Company] to hold all exclusive rights and licenses needed during the term of [Agreement.Term]. including the ability for use of any nicknames, initials, autographs, photographs, or any other property in relation to the advertisement or sale of mentioned product. 在契約期間，乙將專屬授權與甲，包括有權去利用任何乙之別名、藝名、簽名，照片或其他任何與廣告行銷有關之財產或本契約提及之銷售產品。 Endorsement Agreement Effective Date 代言契約生效日 This agreement shall become effective as of signature dates below and will remain effective for a term of 12 months unless prematurely terminated for failure to comply with any of the terms or conditions listed in this agreement. 本契約於下簽名日時生效，並於簽名生效後12個月為契約期間，除非契約任一方有違約情事，於預先終止本契約，否則契約仍有效存續。 Payment of Royalties 給付權利金 [Sender.Company] agrees to pay all royalties due from sales of such products as agreed between parties.Any and all royalties owed will be due on a yearly basis and shall be payable no later than thirty (30) days after the termination of the preceding full calendar quarter. For each royalty period due [Sender.Comany] will provide endorser with written notice of all royalties as well as any and all descriptions of Products that were sold during the Royalty Period or whether any actual Royalty was owed. “Net Sales” shall mean [Sender.Company] gross sales of Product, excluding all customary discounts and allowances as well as returns. The receipt or acceptance by [Endorser.LegalName] for above mentioned statement or payment shall not prevent Endorser from challenging or requesting proof of such document findings. Any and all obligations for the payment of Royalties shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement and will continue for as long as Endorsed Constructor continues to sell the Product or payment is owed. In the event of underpayment to endorser for any and all royalties, endorser will bill for all royalties as well as interest fees in relation for said royalties.
蘇狀師談娛樂法 一、問題 甲經營服飾店，為了增加買氣，遂以店內的音響播放時下最流行的歌曲(CD)，以招攬客源，問甲的行為有無侵害著作權？ 二、解析 首先，CD屬於何種著作？或者一張CD包含了那些著作？我們假設本題CD裏只有一首單曲。(避免問題太過複雜) CD在著作權法屬於錄音著作；歌曲本身屬於音樂著作；還有歌者本身的演出(歌者詮釋該歌曲的表達，唱法、高低音的技巧、換氣、節奏的掌握)，屬於著作權法所要保護的表演。(著作權法第7-1條) 接下來要探究，播放CD涉及了那些著作財產權？甲的行為係公開演出(著作權法第3條第1項第9款)他人的音樂著作(著作權法第5條第1項第8款)，而錄音著作無公開演出權(同法第26條第1項)，至於表演性質上屬於著作鄰接權，其保護程度較(一般著作)低，此見著作權法第26條第2項但書可知。(表演人專有以擴音器或其他器材公開演出其表演之權利。但將表演重製後或公開播送後再以擴音器或其他器材公開演出者，不在此限) 三、結論 甲的行為係公開演出他人的音樂著作，需得原詞、曲創作人的同意或授權；至於公開演出原歌者的表演，依上述之論述(經重製於CD後)不受著作權法保護。就錄音著作部分，因錄音著作無公開演出權，這時著作權法第26條第3項規定，錄音著作權經公開演出者，著作人得請求公開演出之人支付使用報酬，亦即本題製作該CD者(可能是唱片公司或專業的錄音室或者職業配樂編曲者)得向甲請求支付使用報酬。 各位經營不論是賣場、服飾店、美容美髮店的朋友們，要注意未得原創作者同意播放CD，會涉及上述著作(財產)權，(暫不論著作人格權)千萬要小心不要踩線了。
New York-based O’Neil asserts that Hadid infringed his exclusive rights as the copyright holder of the photo “by reproducing and publicly displaying [it] on her Instagram story,” despite the fact that she “is not, and has never been, licensed or otherwise authorized to reproduce, publicly display, distribute and/or use the photograph.” In doing so, O’Neil claims that the 24-year old supermodel ran afoul of his exclusive right to display the image, and distribute copies of it to the public by sale or another form of transfer, such as licensing, among other things. As a result, she should be forced to pay “statutory damages up to $150,000 per work infringed for [her] willful infringement of the photograph,” he argues. 位在紐約的O’Neil 主張哈蒂的行為侵害其為攝影著作之著作人專有重製及公開展示之著作財產權。事實是她未取得授權去重製、公開展示、散布或利用該照片。 O’Neil起訴主張這位24歲的超模，不管是藉由銷售或是另外諸如授權的方式去移轉，侵害其公開展示及散布之排他權。因此，她須就其惡意侵害之每一張照片給付最高至15萬元之法定賠償金。
若你是自己架網站從事交易的業者，不管你賣的是保養品、衣服或日常用品等等，請特別小心，因為在法律上你將可能被認定為是透過網路方式對消費者進行交易的零售業者，你與消費者間的交易條款，可不能隨便想怎麼寫就怎麼寫，必須符合法規，否則將有可能被主管機關裁罰，這邊提供兩步驟教你防踩雷： Step1 基本上，網站上的條款必須符合「零售業等網路交易定型化契約應記載及不得記載事項」(https://www.ey.gov.tw/…/cfed6708-23de-47a0-a828-0548d8004515)，裡面的應記載事項必須在網站上記入，不得記載事項則不能出現在網站上，故請先將上面應記載事項移入你的網站中。 Step2 「零售業等網路交易定型化契約應記載及不得記載事項」是法定範本，當然不能完全照抄，所以移入網站後，請在法定的架構下逐一審閱每筆條款，依照自己經營的實際需求做調整。 舉個常見的問題，法定的範本是規定必須要記載消費者有權七天鑑賞期內退貨。看到這邊，一定很多店家想問，我賣的商品都客製化(例如西裝訂做)，或是屬於個人衛生用品(例如刮鬍刀)，這樣如果可以七天內退貨，我還怎麼做生意？！所以，在這種情況下，其實另外有「通訊交易解除權合理例外情事適用準則」這樣的法規去規定不適用七天鑑賞期的情形，所以範本請不要一字不漏的照抄，一定要在法定架構下依照實際需求做調整，才不會衍生額外消費糾紛，如果有問題請洽律師尋求協助。
蘇思鴻律師
陳禾原律師
